Aramsco, Inc. v. Kerin Dean Hughes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT PIERCE DIVISION CASE NO. 25-14271-CIV-CANNON/Maynard ARAMSCO, INC., Plaintiff, v. KERIN DEAN HUGHES, Defendant. ________________________________/ ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND SETTING REPLEADING DEADLINE THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Magistrate Judge Maynard’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), issued on February 24, 2026 [ECF No. 14]. The Report recommends that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts I and II of Plaintiff’s Complaint for Failure to State a Claim (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 9] be granted. No party filed objections to the Report, and the time to do so has expired. Upon review of the Report and the Motion, the Report [ECF No. 14] is ACCEPTED; the Motion [ECF No. 9] is GRANTED for the reasons stated in the Report; and Plaintiff is granted one final opportunity to file an amended pleading as indicated below. *** To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815, 822 (11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court reviews de novo those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, CASE NO. 25-14271-CIV-CANNON/Maynard or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report, the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the record. Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784.

TK Following review, the Court finds no clear error in the well-reasoned Report. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 14] is ACCEPTED.

2. The Motion [ECF No. 9] is GRANTED for the reasons stated in the Report.

3. Counts I and II of Plaintiffs Complaint [ECF No. 1] are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

4. Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint, but any such amended pleading constitutes Plaintiffs final opportunity to replead in this action; is due no later than May 29, 2026; and must take into account all of the reasoning in the Report and the applicable argument in the Motion [ECF No. 14].

5. Failure to file an amended pleading by that deadline will result in an Order directing Defendant to file an Answer to Counts III and IV of Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1].

ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida, this 15th day of May 2026.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE cc: counsel of record