UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:21-cv-21317-GAYLES/TORRES

MSP RECOVERY CLAIMS, SERIES LLC, a Delaware series limited liability company, MSPA CLAIMS I, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, SERIES PMPI, a designated series of MAO-MSO Recovery II, LLC, a Delaware series limited liability company, and MSP RECOVERY CLAIMS SERIES 44, LLC, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CARING VOICE COALITION, INC., a Delaware corporation, UNITED THERAPEUTICS CORPORATION, an Idaho nonprofit corporation, and SMITHS MEDICAL ASD, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendants. ___________________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’ Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [ECF No. 163] regarding Defendants’, United Therapeutics Corporation and Smiths Medical ASD, Inc., motions to dismiss (the “Motions”) [ECF Nos. 129, 143]. On November 5, 2021, the Court referred this case to Judge Torres, pursuant to

(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters. [ECF No. 106]. On July 21, 2022, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending that the Court grant the Motions without prejudice. The parties timely filed objections, [ECF Nos. 166, 167], and responses, [ECF Nos. 168, 169, 170]. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

(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,

(11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which zo specific objections are made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C.,

(M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc.,

(11th Cir. 2006). Having conducted a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge Torres’ well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Defendants’ Motions should be granted without prejudice. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’ Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 163], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference. 2. Defendant United Therapeutics Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No. 129], is GRANTED without prejudice. 3. Defendant Smiths Medical ASD, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No. 143], is GRANTED without prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 23rd day of September, 2022. of Bie UNITED STATES DIST JUDGE