UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION IN ADMIRALTY

In the Matter of:

THE PETITION OF BLUE SEAS GROUP, LLC and JOHN CHISHOLM, as Owners of the M/V Aquasition II, a 2009 Hydra-Sports 4100 Vector bearing Hull ID: GHYVYA09G809, her engines, tackle, apparel and appurtenances, for exoneration from or limitation of liability, Case No: 8:21-cv-1007-MSS-JSS Petitioners. /

ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Petitioners’ Motion for Default Judgment, (Dkt. 21), and Petitioners’ Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice (Dkt. 23). On February 15, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending Petitioners' Motion for Entry of Default judgment be granted and a default judgment entered against all potential claimants who failed to file a claim in this action by July 23, 2021. (Dkt. 24) No party has filed an objection to Judge Sneed’s Report and Recommendation, and the time for doing so has passed. In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations.

(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright,

(11th Cir. 1982). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or

recommendations to which objection is made.”

(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ.,

, 512 (11th Cir. 1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings

de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn,

, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations.

(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry.,

(11th

Cir. 1994). Upon consideration of Petitioners’ Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice, (Dkt. 23) and the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 24) is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order. 2. Petitioners’ Motion for Default Judgment (Dkt. 21) is GRANTED. 3. A Judgment of Exoneration by Default shall be entered against all parties and claimants having an interest in this matter as well as any other potential claims, other than the claims filed by Progressive American Insurance Company in this proceeding, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 and Supplemental Rule F(5), for failure to timely file a claim or answer. 4. Petitioners shall be exonerated from any responsibility, loss, damage, or injury from all claims arising out of the incident involving M/V Aquasition II, a 2009 MHydra-Sport 4100 Vector, (HULL ID: GHYVYA09G809), on December 18, 2020, except for the claim timely filed by Progressive American Insurance Company, as subrogee of Dominic Leide. 5. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to the claim filed by Progressive American Insurance Company, as subrogee of Dominic Leide. 6. The CLERK is directed to terminate any pending motions and CLOSE this case. DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 7th day of March 2022.

Copies furnished to: UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person