Opinion
19-80196-cv-Cann/Reinhart
03-07-2022
MARTIN E. O'BOYLE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. TOWN OF GULF STREAM, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR COSTS (DE 182)
BRUCE E. REINHART, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
THIS CAUSE is before me upon the District Court's Referral Order. ECF No. 183. Presently before me is Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Costs. ECF No. 183. On January 17, 2022, final judgment was entered in Defendant's favor. ECF No. 182. Defendant, as the prevailing party, seeks reimbursement of $12, 714.33 in costs and has attached invoices supporting this request. The certificate of conference included in the motion indicates that
Plaintiff's counsel does not oppose the motion.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing, this Court RECOMMENDS that Defendant's Motion for Costs (ECF No. 182) be GRANTED.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT
A party shall serve and file written objections, if any, to this Report and Recommendation with the Honorable Aileen M. Cannon, United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of Florida, within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (providing that “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court.”); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (“Within 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy”). Failure to timely file objections shall bar the parties from attacking on appeal the factual findings contained herein. See LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).
DONE and SUBMITTED.