Filed: Jun. 11, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 11, 2014
Summary: ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21; Report), entered by the Honorable James R. Klindt, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 30, 2014. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Klindt recommends that Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue and Memorandum in Support (Dkt. No. 11) be denied. See Report at 12. On May 14, 2014, Defendant filed objections to the Report. See Defendant Dixie Seal & Stamp Co., Inc.'s Ob
Summary: ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21; Report), entered by the Honorable James R. Klindt, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 30, 2014. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Klindt recommends that Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue and Memorandum in Support (Dkt. No. 11) be denied. See Report at 12. On May 14, 2014, Defendant filed objections to the Report. See Defendant Dixie Seal & Stamp Co., Inc.'s Obj..
More
ORDER
MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge.
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21; Report), entered by the Honorable James R. Klindt, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 30, 2014. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Klindt recommends that Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue and Memorandum in Support (Dkt. No. 11) be denied. See Report at 12. On May 14, 2014, Defendant filed objections to the Report. See Defendant Dixie Seal & Stamp Co., Inc.'s Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 22; Objections).1 Thus, this matter is ripe for review.
The Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections to findings of fact are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review the legal conclusions in the report de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court determines that Defendant's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's findings are due to be overruled, and the Report is due to be adopted as the opinion of the Court. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. Defendant Dixie Seal & Stamp Co., Inc.'s Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 22) are OVERRULED.
2. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
3. Defendant's Motion to Transfer Venue and Memorandum in Support (Dkt. No. 11) is DENIED.
4. The stay of discovery imposed in the Order (Dkt. No. 13) entered on December 19, 2013, is LIFTED, and the parties shall have up to and including July 11, 2014, to file a Case Management Report.
DONE AND ORDERED.
