Cauzo v. Katane LLC ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 20-CV-60396-RAR ANTONIO CAUZO, Plaintiff, v. KATANE LLC, et al., Defendants. ______________________________________/ ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR BILL OF COSTS THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon United States Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 112] (“Report”), entered on November 16, 2021. The Report recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Bill of Costs [ECF No. 105] be granted in part and denied in part. See Report at 1. The Report properly notified the parties of their right to object to Magistrate Judge Strauss’s findings and the consequences for failing to object. Id. at 4. The time for objections has passed and neither party filed any objections to the Report. When a magistrate judge’s “disposition” has properly been objected to, district courts must review the disposition de novo. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). However, when no party has timely objected, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72 advisory committee’s notes (citation omitted). Although Rule 72 itself is silent on the standard of review, the Supreme Court has acknowledged Congress’s intent was to only require a de novo review where objections have been properly filed, not when neither party objects. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate [judge]’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”). Because no party has filed an objection to the Report, the Court did not conduct a de novo review of Magistrate Judge Strauss’s findings. Rather, the Court has reviewed the Report for clear error. Finding none, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report [ECF No. 112] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Bill of Costs [ECF No. 105] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff is awarded costs in the amount of $807.60, plus interest from September 3, 2021, for which total sum let execution issue forthwith. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 7th day of December, 2021. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2