BMaddox Enterprises LLC v. Milad Oskouie, Osko M Ltd., and Platinum Avenue Holdings Pty, Ltd.

Filing 241

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 240 Report and Recommendations, 236 Motion for Attorney Fees filed by BMaddox Enterprises LLC, Brandon Lane Maddox. As no objections to Judge Cave's Report were filed, the Court reviews th e Report for clear error. After careful consideration of the record, the Court finds no error and thus adopts the thorough and well-reasoned Report in its entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff is awarded $223,560.00 in attorneys' fees. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion pending at docket number 236. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 1/30/23) (yv)

Case 1:17-cv-01889-RA-SLC Document 241 Filed 01/30/23 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
BMADDOX ENTERPRISES LLC,
Plaintiff,
No. 17-CV-1889 (RA) (SLC)

v.
MILAD OSKOUIE, OSKO M LTD, and
PLATINUM AVENUE HOLDINGS PTY,
LTD,

ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendants.
MILAD OSKOUIE and PLATINUM
AVENUE HOLDINGS PTY, LTD,
Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
v.
BMADDOX ENTERPRISES LLC and
BRANDON MADDOX,
Counterclaim Defendants.
RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge:
On August 18, 2021, this Court granted in part Plaintiff BMaddox Enterprise LLC’s motion
for summary judgment against Defendant Milad Oskouie and Plaintiff’s motion for default
judgment against Defendants Osko M Ltd. and Platinum Avenue Holding Pty, Ltd. On April 18,
2022, Plaintiff filed the pending unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs under section 505
of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 505, and this Court referred the motion to Magistrate Judge
Cave. On January 6, 2023, Judge Cave issued a report and recommendation (the “Report”), to
which no party has filed an objection.

Case 1:17-cv-01889-RA-SLC Document 241 Filed 01/30/23 Page 2 of 2

A district 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)(l). Parties may object to a
magistrate judge’s recommended findings “[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the
recommended disposition.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). “When the parties make no objections to the
Report, the Court may adopt the Report if ‘there is no clear error on the face of the record.’” Smith
v. Corizon Health Servs., No. 14-CV-8839 (GBD), 2015 WL 6123563, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16,
2015) (quoting Adee Motor Cars, LLC v. Amato, 388 F. Supp. 2d 250, 253 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)).
“Furthermore, if as here . . . the magistrate judge’s report states that failure to object will preclude
appellate review and no objection is made within the allotted time, then the failure to object
generally operates as a waiver of the right to appellate review.” Hamilton v. Mount Sinai Hosp.,
331 F. App’x 874, 875 (2d Cir. 2009) (internal citations omitted).
As no objections to Judge Cave’s Report were filed, the Court reviews the Report for clear
error. After careful consideration of the record, the Court finds no error and thus adopts the
thorough and well-reasoned Report in its entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff is awarded $223,560.00
in attorneys’ fees. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion pending at
docket number 236.

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 30, 2023
New York, New York

________________________________
Ronnie Abrams
United States District Judge