Daedalus Capital LLC et al v. Vinecombe et al

Filing 188

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 112 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Mary S. Scriven on 9/12/2014. (KMS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
DAEDALUS CAPITAL LLC and
LOCKWOOD TECHNOLOGY
CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No: 8:12-cv-2533-T-35TBM

BRADFORD VINECOMBE, BRUNO
REIGL, ADAM VINECOMBE, ERIC
VINECOMBE, LOCKWOOD
WORLDWIDE, INC., and SWIFTSURE
GROUP LLC,
Defendants.

ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss Amended Complaint (Dkt. 112), filed on April 15, 2013. On August 22, 2014,
United States Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun III issued a Report and
Recommendation (Dkt. 185), recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss be
denied. 1 No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation, and the deadline
to do so has passed.
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, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). A district judge “shall make

1

The Report and Recommendation did not address Defendants’ issue with Plaintiffs’ demand for attorney’s
fees in Counts IX and X. (Dkt. 112 at P. 24-25) To the extent that an issue still remains it will be dealt with
by the Court on motions for summary judgment.

1

a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires
that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection
has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F.2d 507, 512 (11th
Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)).

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. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an
independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and
Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 185), is CONFIRMED and
ADOPTED as part of this Order; and
2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Dkt. 112), is hereby
DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 12th day of September, 2014.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Any Unrepresented Person

2