From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ME Tech. v. Brownstein

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Dec 7, 2020
CASE NO. 20-61508-CIV-DIMITROULEAS (S.D. Fla. Dec. 7, 2020)

Opinion

CASE NO. 20-61508-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

12-07-2020

ME TECHNOLOGY INC. d/b/a CAA USA, Plaintiff, v. ELLIOT BROWNSTEIN, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff ME Technology, Inc. d/b/a CAA USA ("Plaintiff")'s Motion for Final Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction [DE 41], filed September 28, 2020; Plaintiff's Motion for Determination of Damages [DE 50], filed October 21, 2020; and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow (the "Report") [DE 55], dated November 13, 2020.

On October 15, 2020, the Court granted the Motion for Final Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction [DE 41] and referred only the damages portion of Magistrate Judge Snow, who requested separate briefing as to the determination of damages. See [DE's 47, 49, 50]. Judge Snow held an evidentiary hearing on the Motions on November 5, 2020 and issued a Report and Recommendation on November 13, 2020. See [DE's 53, 55]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 55] have been filed and that the time for filing such objections has passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge's factual findings in the Report [DE 55] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).

Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report [DE 55] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's reasoning and conclusion that the Plaintiff's Motions [DE's 41, 50] Plaintiff's Motion should be granted and that Plaintiff should be awarded damages in the amount of $290,000 against Defendant Elliot Brownstein consistent with the Report.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report [DE 55] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED;

2. Plaintiff's Motions [DE's 41, 50] are hereby GRANTED.

3. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, the Court shall enter a separate final judgment.

4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to Defendant Elliot Brownstein at the address below.

DONE AND ORDERED, in Chambers in Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida this 7th day of December, 2020.

/s/_________

WILLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS

United States District Judge Copies to: Counsel of Record Elliot Brownstein
1189 Lake Victoria Drive, Apt. 1
West Palm Beach, FL 33411


Summaries of

ME Tech. v. Brownstein

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Dec 7, 2020
CASE NO. 20-61508-CIV-DIMITROULEAS (S.D. Fla. Dec. 7, 2020)
Case details for

ME Tech. v. Brownstein

Case Details

Full title:ME TECHNOLOGY INC. d/b/a CAA USA, Plaintiff, v. ELLIOT BROWNSTEIN…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Date published: Dec 7, 2020

Citations

CASE NO. 20-61508-CIV-DIMITROULEAS (S.D. Fla. Dec. 7, 2020)

Citing Cases

Sirer v. Aksoy

(S.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2020), report and recommendation adopted, No. 20-61508-CIV, 2020 WL 7187740 (S.D. Fla. …