BORLOGLOU v. STEAK N SHAKE OPERATIONS, INC., 6:16-cv-1018-Orl-41DAB. (2016)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20160808881
Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER CARLOS E. MENDOZA , District Judge . THIS CAUSE is before the Court on U.S. Magistrate Judge David A. Baker's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R," Doc. 13), which recommends that this case be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Removing-Defendant purports to object to the R&R. ( See Doc. 14). A district court is required to review de novo the objected-to portions of a magistrate judge's recommendation and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part" the reco
Summary: ORDER CARLOS E. MENDOZA , District Judge . THIS CAUSE is before the Court on U.S. Magistrate Judge David A. Baker's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R," Doc. 13), which recommends that this case be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Removing-Defendant purports to object to the R&R. ( See Doc. 14). A district court is required to review de novo the objected-to portions of a magistrate judge's recommendation and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part" the recom..
More
ORDER
CARLOS E. MENDOZA, District Judge.
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on U.S. Magistrate Judge David A. Baker's Report and Recommendation (the "R&R," Doc. 13), which recommends that this case be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Removing-Defendant purports to object to the R&R. (See Doc. 14).
A district court is required to review de novo the objected-to portions of a magistrate judge's recommendation and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part" the recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). For the reasons stated in the July 25, 2016 Order, Belmonte v. Steak N Shake Operations, Inc., 6:16-cv-488-Orl-41KRS (M.D. Fla.) (Doc. 17), Defendant's objections will be overruled.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order.
2. Defendant's Objections (Doc. 14) are OVERRULED.
3. This case is REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit, in and for Osceola County, Florida—Case No. 2016-CA-1323-OC.
4. The Clerk is directed to close this case.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
