Eurocon, LLC v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 1:19-cv-24351-JLK EUROCON, LLC, Plaintiff, v. EMPIRE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ________________________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION1 ON PLAINITFF’S BILL OF COSTS THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff, Eurocon, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”), Motion for Bill of Costs. ECF No. [48]. Following the entry of the District Court’s Order granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Appraisal, Plaintiff filed its Bill of Costs. Id. Defendant, Empire Indemnity Insurance Company (“Defendant”), opposed Plaintiff’s entitlement to costs because it argued that the request was premature. ECF No. [49]. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed its Notice of Withdrawing Bill of Costs (ECF No. 48) Without Prejudice. ECF No. [59]. In its Notice, Plaintiff states that because Defendant has “opted to continue litigating this matter . . . [it] withdraws its Bill of Costs without prejudice to refile at a later date and request entitlement to same once the matter is ripe.” Id. at 1–2. In response, Defendant filed a Notice of Non-objection, stating that it “does not object to [Plaintiff]’s withdrawal of the Bill of Costs without prejudice to re-file if they are entitled to file another bill of costs pursuant to the relevant rules of procedure and statute.” ECF No. [61] at 1. Defendant 1 This matter was referred to the undersigned by the Honorable James Lawrence King, Senior United States District Judge. ECF No. [50]. further states that it “reserves its right to object to any bill of costs filed by [Plaintiff] in the future or object to any other request by [Plaintiff] to recover its fees and/or costs.” /d. at 2. Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that Plaintiffs Bill of Costs be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff should be permitted to re-file its Bill of Costs if and when it becomes entitled to do so. OBJECTIONS A party shall serve and file written objections, if any, to this Report and Recommendation with the United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of Florida, within THREE (3) DAYS of being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. The Court has provided a shortened objection period because the relief requested is unopposed. Failure to timely file objections will bar a de novo determination by the District Judge of anything in this Recommendation and shall constitute a waiver of a party’s “right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.” 11th Cir. R. 3-1 (2016); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Harrigan v. Metro-Dade Police Dep’t Station #4, 977 F.3d 1185, 1191-92 (11th Cir. 2020). DONE AND SUBMITTED in chambers at Miami, Florida on June 20, 2021. UNITED YJATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE