In the Matter of Bryan Crino, as owner of a 2021 Pursuit DCV 326 bearing Hull...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION IN THE MATTER OF: Case No: 8:25-cv-1224-MSS-AEP IN ADMIRALTY BRYAN CRINO, as owner of a 2021 Pursuit DCV 326 bearing Hull Identification No.: PURD21821021, its Engines, Tackle, Appurtenances, Equipment, Etc., In a cause for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, Petitioner.

ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Petitioner’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment. (Dkt. 13) On November 20, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli issued a Report and Recommendation, (Dkt.

15), which recommended that Petitioner’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment be granted and all persons or entities who failed to file a claim or answer be barred from the filing of any further claims or answers in these proceedings or in any other proceedings related to or arising out of the event described in the Complaint. (Dkt. 1) No potential claimants filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation and the deadline for doing so has passed. Upon consideration of all relevant filings, case law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment.

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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (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.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(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., 896 F.2d 507, (11th Cir. 1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). Absent specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 15), is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order.

2. Petitioner’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, (Dkt. 13), is GRANTED.

3. The Clerk is directed to enter a Default Judgment against any or all potential claimants who failed to file a claim or answer in this proceeding.

4. All persons or entities who failed to file a claim or answer are barred from the filing of any further claims or answers in these proceedings or in any other proceedings related to or arising out of the event described in the Complaint.

5. The Clerk 1s directed to CLOSE THIS CASE.

DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 10th day of December 2025.

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