Federal Trade Commission v. MOBE Ltd. et al
Filing
295
It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 294) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order in its entirety. The Receiver's Motion (Doc. 293) is GRANTED such that the Receiver is authorized to pay himself $70,125.00 for services rendered. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 10/25/2022. (ALL)
Case 6:18-cv-00862-RBD-DCI Document 295 Filed 10/25/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 9430
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 6:18-cv-862-RBD-DCI
MOBE LTD.;
MOBEPROCESSING.COM, INC.;
TRANSACTION MANAGEMENT
USA, INC.; MOBETRAINING.COM,
INC.; 9336-0311 QUEBEC INC.;
MOBE PRO LIMITED; MOBE INC.;
MOBE ONLINE LTD.; MATT
LLOYD PUBLISHING.COM PTY
LTD.; MATTHEW LLOYD
MCPHEE; SUSAN ZANGHI;
INGRID WHITNEY; and QUALPAY,
INC.,
Defendants.
____________________________________
ORDER
Before the Court is Receiver’s Verified Seventh Interim Application for
Payment for Services Rendered. (Doc. 293 (“Motion”).) On referral, U.S. Magistrate
Judge Daniel C. Irick recommends granting the Motion because the requested fees
are reasonable. (Doc. 294 (“R&R”).) The parties did not object and the deadline has
passed, so the Court reviews the R&R for clear error only. See Macort v. Prem, Inc.,
208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the R&R is due to be adopted
Case 6:18-cv-00862-RBD-DCI Document 295 Filed 10/25/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 9431
in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1.
The R&R (Doc. 294) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part
of this Order in its entirety.
2.
The Receiver’s Motion (Doc. 293) is GRANTED such that the Receiver
is authorized to pay himself $70,125.00 for services rendered.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on October 25,
2022.
Copies:
Pro se Defendant Matthew Lloyd McPhee
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?