Gaston v. Gutierrez

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

FRANZUA RENZO ZULOETA RAMIREZ GASTON,

Petitioner,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-1411-JSS-LHP

CYNTHIA ISABEL CHAVEZ GUTIERREZ,

Respondent. ___________________________________/ ORDER Petitioner Franzua Renzo Zuloeta Ramirez Gaston moves for attorney’s fees and expenses against Respondent Cynthia Isabel Chavez Gutierrez pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 9007(b)(3). (Motion, Dkt. 74.) On May 5, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Leslie Hoffman Price entered a Report and Recommendation recommending that Petitioner’s Motion be granted in part and denied in part and that Petitioner be awarded $6,867.00 in attorney’s fees, $405.00 in court costs, and $930.58 for other necessary expenses. (Dkt. 76.) Neither party has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to do so has now passed. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. With respect to non-dispositive matters, the district judge “must consider timely objections and modify or set aside any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); see Jordan v. Comm’r, Miss. Dep’t of Corr., 947 F.3d 1322, 1327 (11th Cir. 2020). For dispositive

matters, the district judge must conduct a de novo review of any portion of the report and recommendation to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); United States v. Farias-Gonzalez, 556 F.3d 1181, 1184 n.1 (11th Cir. 2009) (“A district court makes a de novo determination of those portions of a

magistrate’s report to which objections are filed.”). Even in the absence of a specific objection, the district judge reviews any legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019). Upon conducting a careful and complete review of the Magistrate Judge’s

findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the court adopts the report and recommendation in full. Accordingly: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 76) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

2. Petitioner’s Second Amended Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Necessary Expenses (Dkt. 74) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 3. Petitioner is awarded $6,867.00 in attorney’s fees, $405.00 in court costs, and $930.58 for other necessary expenses. 4. Otherwise, the Motion is DENIED. 5. The case remains closed. ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on May 21, 2025.

. —— JUKIE S. SNEED NITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record

-3-