Athos Overseas Limited Corp. v. YouTube, Inc.

Opinion

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:21-cv-21698-GAYLES/TORRES

ATHOS OVERSEAS, LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

YOUTUBE, INC., YOUTUBE, LLC, and GOOGLE, LLC,

Defendants. ________________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’ Amended Report and Recommendation (the “Amended Report”), [ECF No. 185], regarding Plaintiff Athos Overseas, Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“Plaintiff’s Motion”), [ECF Nos. 113, 125], and Defendants YouTube, Inc., YouTube, LLC, and Google LLC’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (“Defendants’ Motion”), [ECF Nos. 115, 134-1]. This case was referred to Judge Torres, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters. [ECF No. 155]. On May 16, 2023, Judge Torres issued his original Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion and grant Defendants’ Motion. [ECF No. 171]. Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Report, [ECF Nos. 177, 183], to which Defendants responded, [ECF No. 184]. Judge Torres subsequently issued the Amended Report to correct minor scrivener’s errors. [ECF No. 185]. 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 that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see 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., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Having conducted a de novo review of the record, including the Motion, the Amended Report, Plaintiff's objections, and Defendants’ response to the objections, the Court agrees with Judge Torres’ well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be denied, and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’ Amended Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 185], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference. (2) Plaintiff Athos Overseas, Ltd.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, [ECF Nos. 113, 125], is DENIED. (3) Defendants YouTube, Inc., YouTube, LLC, and Google LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [ECF Nos. 115, 134-1], is GRANTED. (4) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, final judgment shall be entered separately. (5) The Status Conference scheduled for August 30, 2023, is CANCELLED. (6) This action is CLOSED for administrative purposes. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 29th day of August, 2023.

DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES’ DISTRICT JUDGE ce: All Counsel of Record