UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 0:19-cv-61275-DPG

DIPLOMAT GOLF COURSE VENTURE, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS, LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY NO.: PDX-40025-00, et al.,

Defendants. ______________________________________/

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”). [ECF No. 603]. On March 31, 2023, Defendant Vericlaim, Inc. filed its Motion for Costs Pursuant to

and Memorandum of Law in Support. [ECF No. 585]. On May 12, 2023, Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company (“Indian Harbor”) filed its Amended and Renewed Verified Motion for Entitlement to an Award of Reasonable Fees and Costs and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. [ECF No. 588]. On May 12, 2023, Defendant Fair American Select Insurance Company filed its Motion for Costs Pursuant to

and Memorandum of Law Support. [ECF No. 589]. On May 16, 2023, these matters were referred to Judge Hunt, pursuant to

, for a report and recommendation. [ECF No. 590]. Judge Hunt’s Report recommends that the Court deny all three Motions. [ECF No. 603]. On September 7, 2023, Indian Harbor filed its Objections to August 24, 2023 Report and Recommendation. [ECF No. 604]. On September 21, 2023, Plaintiff Diplomat Golf Course Venture, LLC filed its Response to Indian Harbor Insurance Company’s Objections to August 24, 2023, Report and Recommendation. [ECF No. 605].

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 objection is 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 no specific objection is 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).

This Court, having conducted a de novo review of the record, agrees with Judge Hunt’s well-reasoned analysis and agrees that the Motions must be denied. Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

(1) Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company’s Objections to August 24, 2023 Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 604], are OVERRULED; (2) Magistrate Judge Hunt’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 603], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; (3) Defendant Vericlaim, Inc.’s Motion for Costs Pursuant to

and Memorandum of Law in Support, [ECF No. 585], is DENIED; (4) Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company’s Amended and Renewed Verified Motion for Entitlement to an Award of Reasonable Fees and Costs and Incorporated

Memorandum of Law, [ECF No. 588], is DENIED; and (5) Defendant Fair American Select Insurance Company filed its Motion for Costs Pursuant to

and Memorandum of Law Support, [ECF No. 589], is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 30th day of October, 2023.

| 2 : DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DIS/TRACT JUDGE