Musashi AZ, LLC v. MarineMax East, Inc., Fortun Insurance, LLC, and Azimut Benetti Service USA, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1: 24-CV-24250-DPG

MUSASHI AZ, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARINEMAX EAST, INC., FORTUN INSURANCE, LLC, and AZIMUT BENETTI SERVICE USA, INC.,

Defendants. ______________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Detra Shaw-Wilder (the “Report”), [ECF No. 96], on Defendant Fortun Insurance, LLC’s (“Fortun”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (“Motion”), [ECF No. 65]. On July 21, 2025, Plaintiff Musashi AZ, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed its Response in Opposition to Fortun’s Motion [ECF No. 69]. On July 28, 2025, Fortun filed its Reply. [ECF No. 71]. On February 23, 2026, Judge Shaw-Wilder issued her Report recommending that Fortun’s Motion be denied, [ECF No. 96]. Neither party objected to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The objected portions of the report and recommendation 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). Because neither party has objected to any portion of the Report, the Court reviewed the Report for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Shaw- Wilder’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Fortun’s Motion [ECF No. 65] should be denied. CONCLUSION Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 96], is ADOPTED in full. (2) Defendant Fortun Insurance, LLC’s Motion, [ECF No. 65], is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 12th day of March 2026.

DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE