Opinion
19-21546-cv-DPG
11-03-2022
IVAN JIMENEZ, JUAN MACHADO, JOSE MUNOZ, GUILLERMO SENCION and MIGUEL VASQUEZ, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Defendants.
ORDER
DARRIN P. GAYLES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes' Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), [ECF No. 86], regarding: (1) Defendants', United States Department of Homeland Security and United States Department of State, Motion for Summary Judgment (hereafter, “Motion”), [ECF No. 29]; and (2) Plaintiffs', Ivan Jimenez, Juan Machado, Jose Munoz, Guillermo Sencion, and Miguel Vasquez, (together, “Plaintiffs”), Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (hereafter, “Cross-Motion”), [ECF No. 62]. On December 6, 2021, the action was referred to Judge Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on the parties' respective motions. [ECF No. 83]. Following briefings and a hearing on February 9, 2022, Judge Otazo-Reyes issued her report on February 24, 2022, recommending that Defendants' Motion be granted, Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion be denied, and Final Judgment be entered in favor of Defendants (the “Report”). [ECF No. 86]. Plaintiffs have timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 99].
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 Fed.Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
Having conducted a de novo review of the motions and the record, the Court agrees with Judge Otazo-Reyes' well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Defendants' Motion should be granted and Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion should be denied.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) Judge Otazo-Reyes' Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 86], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference.
(2) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, [ECF No. 29], is GRANTED.
(3) Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, [ECF No. 62], is DENIED.
(4) Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants as to Counts I-X.
DONE AND ORDERED.