Braman Motors, Inc. v. BMW of North America, LLC ( 2022 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 1:17-cv-23360-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES BRAMAN MOTORS, INC., for itself and in the name of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles of the State of Florida, for its use and benefit, and doing business as Braman BMW, PALM BEACH IMPORTS, INC., for itself and in the name of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles of the State of Florida, for its use and benefit, and doing business as Braman Motorcars, THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES of the State of Florida, for the use and benefit of Braman Motors, Inc. and Palm Beach Imports, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, and BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, Defendants. ______________________________________/ ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [ECF No. 344] regarding Defendant Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft’s (“BMW AG”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and 12(b)(6) for Failure to State a Claim (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 275]. On September 6, 2017, Plaintiffs, Braman Motors, Inc., Palm Beach Imports, Inc., and the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles for the State of Florida (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), filed this action against Defendant BMW of North America, LLC (“BMW NA”). [ECF No. 1]. On April 19, 2018, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint against BMW NA and BMW AG. On January 31, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their Third Amended Complaint against BMW NA and BMW AG. [ECF No. 125 & 127]. On February 15, 2019, BMW AG moved to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. [ECF No. 129]. On September 30, 2019, the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss and dismissed BMW AG without prejudice. [ECF No. 154]. On February 17, 2021, Plaintiffs filed their Fourth Amended Complaint against BMW NA and BMW AG. [ECF No. 222]. On June 11, 2021, BMW AG moved to dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. [ECF No. 275]. On August 5, 2021, the Court referred this matter to Judge Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters. [ECF No. 289]. On February 16, 2022, Judge Otazo-Reyes issued her Report recommending that the Motion be granted and the Fourth Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice as to BMW AG. No objections were timely filed. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objections are made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Having reviewed the Report for clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Otazo-Reyes well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the Motion be granted and the Fourth Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice as to BMW AG. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 344], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this order by reference. 2. Defendant Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and 12(b)(6) for Failure to State a Claim, [ECF No. 275], is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amended Complaint, [ECF No. 222], is DISMISSED with prejudice as to Defendant Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft only. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida, 9th day of March, 2021. i. £ UNITED STATES DIST JUDGE