From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kleiman v. Wright

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Mar 30, 2022
18-cv-80176-BLOOM/Reinhart (S.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2022)

Opinion

18-cv-80176-BLOOM/Reinhart

03-30-2022

IRA KLEIMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CRAIG WRIGHT, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Defendant Dr. Craig Wright's Motion for Bill of Costs, ECF No. [871], and Plaintiff W & K Info Defense Research's Motion for Entry of Taxable Costs, ECF No. [872] (“Motions”). The Motions were previously referred to the Honorable Bruce E. Reinhart for a Report and Recommendations (“R&R”). See ECF No. [876]. On March 14, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued a R&R recommending that the Motions be granted in part and denied in part. ECF No. [890]. The R&R advised the parties to file any objections within fourteen days of the date of service of a copy of the R&R. Id. To date, the parties have not filed objections, nor have the parties sought additional time in which to do so.

Plaintiff W & K Info Defense Research LLC's Response to Defendant Craig Wright's Motion is at ECF No. [880] and Defendant Craig Wright's Reply is at ECF No. [883]. Defendant Craig Wright's Response to Plaintiff W&K Info Defense Research, LLC's Motion is at ECF No. [881] and Plaintiff W&K Info Defense Research, LLC's Reply is at ECF No. [884].

Nevertheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court therefore agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that the Motions must be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART for the reasons set forth therein.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows

1. The R&R, ECF No. [890], is ADOPTED.
2. Defendant Dr. Craig Wright's Motion for Bill of Costs, ECF No. [871], is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART Defendant Craig Wright is entitled to recovery of $1,170 in process server fees, $97,627.95 for transcripts, $4,167.54 in witness fees, and $180.57 in copying costs for a total of $103,146.06 in taxable costs
3. Plaintiff W&K Info Defense Research, LLC's Motion for Entry of Taxable Costs, ECF No. [872], is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART Plaintiff W&K Info Defense Research, LLC is entitled to recovery of $585.00 in process server fees, $97,671.24 for transcripts, and $120.00 in witness fees for a total of $98,376.24 in taxable costs.

DONE AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

Kleiman v. Wright

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Mar 30, 2022
18-cv-80176-BLOOM/Reinhart (S.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2022)
Case details for

Kleiman v. Wright

Case Details

Full title:IRA KLEIMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CRAIG WRIGHT, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Date published: Mar 30, 2022

Citations

18-cv-80176-BLOOM/Reinhart (S.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2022)

Citing Cases

Bryant v. Mascara

Defendants have not shown why they are entitled to reimbursement beyond the statutory $40 payment, and…