Bancor Group Inc. v. Rodriguez

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.: 22-cv-20201-GAYLES/TORRES

BANCOR GROUP INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GABINA RODRIGUEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Verified Complaint (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 21]. The action was referred to Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin Torres, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive matters, and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 9]. On June 14, 2022, Judge Torres issued his report recommending that the Motion be denied (the “Report”). [ECF No. 67]. Defendants have timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 85]. In particular, Defendants argue that the Report draws inferences beyond those reasonably contemplated by the allegations in the Complaint and infringes on executive branch functions. Id. 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 objection is 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 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). In his Report, Judge Torres finds that Plaintiffs have adequately alleged their claims. The Court has reviewed the Report and Defendants’ objections and has conducted a de novo review of the record. The Court agrees with Judge Torres’s finding that the Complaint adequately states a claim and recommendation that the Motion be denied. However, the Court does not adopt Section I.C of Report, “Inferences drawn from the complaint”, because those “inferences” are too far removed from the allegations in the Complaint and are not necessary to resolve the Motion. CONCLUSION Accordingly, after careful consideration, itis ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Torres’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 67], is ADOPTED in part; (2) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Verified Complaint [ECF No. 21] is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 25th day of July, 2022.

Df DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DI CT JUDGE