ORDER

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 154), filed on February 21, 2018, recommending that the Plaintiffs' Petition for Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order With Asset Freeze and Motion to Disqualify M. Sean Moyles and Defendants' Bankruptcy Attorney as Counsel for All Defendants (Doc. # 118) be denied. As of the date of this Order, no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed and the time for objections has now passed.

Discussion

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 (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).

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge and the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

DONE and ORDERED.