ORDER

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ CONVINGTON, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court upon consideration of the report and recommendation of the Honorable Anthony E. Porcelli, United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 51), which was filed on August 1, 2014, recommending that Plaintiff's November 18, 2013, Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. # 5) be denied. No objections have been filed, and the time to file objections has expired.

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F.Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994).

The Court has conducted an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration, the Court accepts and adopts the report and recommendation.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

DONE and ORDERED.