Filed: Mar. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 22, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER ARTHUR D. SPATT , District Judge . Plaintiffs Zuffa, LLC, d/b/a Ultimate fighting Championship ("UFC"), and Joe Hand Promotions ("Joe Hand") (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), commenced this action against Defendants South Beach Saloon, Inc., d/b/a South Beach Saloon ("South Beach"), and Michael J. Maupin ("Maupin") (collectively, the "Defendants"), alleging that the Defendants' public exhibition of a "Pay-Per-View" event without license or permission violated
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER ARTHUR D. SPATT , District Judge . Plaintiffs Zuffa, LLC, d/b/a Ultimate fighting Championship ("UFC"), and Joe Hand Promotions ("Joe Hand") (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), commenced this action against Defendants South Beach Saloon, Inc., d/b/a South Beach Saloon ("South Beach"), and Michael J. Maupin ("Maupin") (collectively, the "Defendants"), alleging that the Defendants' public exhibition of a "Pay-Per-View" event without license or permission violated t..
More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER
ARTHUR D. SPATT, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Zuffa, LLC, d/b/a Ultimate fighting Championship ("UFC"), and Joe Hand Promotions ("Joe Hand") (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), commenced this action against Defendants South Beach Saloon, Inc., d/b/a South Beach Saloon ("South Beach"), and Michael J. Maupin ("Maupin") (collectively, the "Defendants"), alleging that the Defendants' public exhibition of a "Pay-Per-View" event without license or permission violated the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §§ 106 and 501, and the Federal Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. §§ 553 and 605.
On May 25, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. In the decision, the Court awarded Plaintiffs $6,000 in damages, but denied the Plaintiffs' motion for attorney's fees and costs, without prejudice, and with leave to re-file as a formal motion with supporting documentation.
On June 27, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed a formal motion for attorney's fees and costs.
On June 28, 2018, the Court referred the motion to United States Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson for a Report and Recommendation as to whether the motion should be granted, and the amount of fees to be awarded, if any.
On March 6, 2019, Judge Tomlinson issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") that Plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees and costs be granted and the Plaintiffs be awarded (1) $46,375.00 in attorneys' fees and (2) $668.86 in costs. Judge Tomlinson electronically served a copy of the R&R on the parties.
It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections.
As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error).
Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Plaintiff is awarded attorney's fees and costs in the amount explained in the R&R.
SO ORDERED.
