Webimax, LLC v. Johnson

Filing 69

ORDER adopting 68 Report and Recommendation; granting 65 Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Confidential Settlement Agreement. The Injunction is dissolved, and the bond is discharged. This case is dismissed, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close the file. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 2/8/2013. (JW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
WEBIMAX, LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:11-cv-993-J-34JBT

DANIEL JOHNSON,
Defendant.
____________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Joel B. Toomey’s Report and
Recommendation (Dkt. No. 68; Report), entered on January 11, 2013. In the Report,
Magistrate Judge Toomey recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Confidential
Settlement Agreement and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Dkt. No. 65) be granted and
that the Court enter an order declaring the settlement agreement to be valid and
enforceable. See Report at 14. No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time
for doing so has now passed.
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 facts 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 legal conclusions
de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern 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).
Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate
Judge’s Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions
recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 68) is

ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Confidential Settlement Agreement and

Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Dkt. No. 65) is GRANTED.
3.

The Confidential Settlement Agreement entered into by the parties is valid and

enforceable.
4.

Pursuant to Paragraph 8 of the Confidential Settlement Agreement, this action

is DISMISSED, with each party bearing its own attorneys’ fees and costs.
5.

The Injunction (Dkt. No. 17) entered on December 7, 2011, is DISSOLVED.

6.

The Injunction Bond (Dkt. No. 19) filed in this action on December 9, 2011, is

DISCHARGED, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to return the original bond to counsel
for Plaintiff.
7.

Webimax, LLC and SureTec Insurance Company are released from the

obligations of the Injunction Bond.

8.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 8th day of February, 2013.

ja
Copies to:
The Honorable Joel B. Toomey
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Daniel Johnson
29 Captiva Drive
Ponte Vedra, FL 32081