Opinion
Case No. 2:07-cv-84-FtM-34DNF.
December 12, 2007
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Douglas N. Frazier's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 125; Report), entered on November 19, 2007, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 108; Motion) be denied. In the Motion, Plaintiff sought leave of Court "to amend its Complaint to add claims against Suncoast Roofers Supply, Inc. ("Suncoast") as a party/defendant based on recently discovered evidence." Motion at 1. A review of the record reveals that Plaintiff did not file objections to the Report within ten days of its filing or the date of the instant Order. Indeed, in Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendants Joe Nemia and Mike Clarchick and Count IV (Trade Secrets), Without Prejudice (Dkt. No. 135), filed on December 4, 2007, Plaintiff represents that it is no longer pursuing claims against Suncoast. See id. at 1-2.
The Court "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). If no specific objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at * 1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007). Based upon an independent examination of the record and a de novo review of the legal conclusions, the Court will adopt the Report of the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. Magistrate Judge Douglas N. Frazier's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 125) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 108) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida.