Alban Osio v. Maduro Moros

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 1:21-cv-20706-GAYLES/TORRES MEUDY ALBÁN OSIO in her personal capacity and in her capacity as the personal representative of the Estate of FERNANDO ALBERTO ALBÁN, FERNANDO ALBÁN OSIO, and MARIA FERNANDA ALBÁN OSIO, Plaintiffs, v. NICOLAS MADURO MOROS, FUERZAS ARMADAS REVOLUCIONARIAS DE COLOMBIA (“FARC”), THE CARTEL OF THE SUNS A.K.A.

CARTEL DE LOS SOLES, VLADIMIR PADRINO LOPEZ, MAIKEL JOSE MORENO PEREZ, NESTOR LUIS REVEROL TORRES, and TAREK WILLIAM SAAB, Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on JP Morgan’s Motion to Consolidate and Transfer the Stansell and Osio Interpleader Proceedings to the Southern District of New York (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 325]. On November 8, 2024, the Court referred all post-judgment matters to Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres. On January 27, 2025, Judge Torres issued his Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) recommending that the Motion be granted. [ECF No. 357].

Plaintiffs have timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 369].

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).

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report, the record, and Judge Robert N.

Scola, Jr.’s Order adopting Judge Torres’ Report in the Stansell proceeding (the “Stansell Order”).

Case No. 19-cv-20896-CIV-Scola [ECF No. 687]. The Court agrees with Judge Torres and Judge Scola’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the Motion should be granted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 357], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference.

2. JPMorgan’s Motion to Consolidate and Transfer the Stansell and Osio Interpleader Proceedings to the Southern District of New York, [ECF No. 325], is GRANTED.

3. As detailed in the Stansell Order, the following pleadings are consolidated and transferred to the Southern District of New York: (a) JPMorgan’s Answer, Counterclaim and Third-Party Complaint for Relief in Interpleader. [ECF No. 242] and [Stansell, ECF No. 585]; (b) the Osio and Stansell Plaintiffs’ Motions to Dismiss JPMorgan’s Counterclaim and Third-Party Complaint [ECF No. 300] and [Stansell, ECF No. 603]; (c) the Stansell Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Final TRIA Turnover Judgment Regarding the Valero Account. [Stansell, ECF No. 624]; (d) the Osio Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Valero Energy. [ECF No. 262]; and (e) Osio and Stansell Plaintiffs’ Motion to Direct Deposit into Court Registry. [ Stansell, ECF No. 629].

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 7th day of April, 2025.

DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DIST JUDGE