Opinion
23-80038-CIV-CANN
05-24-2023
CHRISTOPHER MCWILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. ECN U.S. HOLDINGS CORP., et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 42]
AILEEN M. CANNON, DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (the “Report”) [ECF No. 42], filed on May 9, 2023. On February 10, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand Count V of the Complaint to State Court (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 14]. On May 9, 2023, following referral, Judge Reinhart issued a Report recommending denial of the Motion [ECF No. 42 pp. 1, 7]. Objections to the Report were due on May 23, 2023 [ECF No. 42 p. 7]. On May 12, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Non-Objection to the Report [ECF No. 43]. Defendants have not filed objections to the Report, and the time to do so has expired [ECF No. 42 p. 7].
To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815, 822 (11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed.Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court reviews de novo those portions of the report to which objection is made and 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)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge's report, the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the record. Macort, 208 Fed.Appx. at 784. Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 Fed.Appx. 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Following de novo review, the Court finds the Report to be well reasoned and correct. For the reasons set forth in the Report [ECF No. 42 pp. 1-6], it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 42] is ACCEPTED.
2. The Motion [ECF No. 14] is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED