Opinion
3:19cv1824
06-11-2024
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel DIVYAKANT PATEL and HARSHAD PATEL, Plaintiffs/Relators v. THE FIDELITY DEPOSIT & DISCOUNT BANK, FIDELITY D&D BANKCORP, INC., ANKIM M. SHAH, MARINA CAPITAL LLC, 1101 NORTHERN BOULEVARD LLC, Defendants
Bloom Magistrate Judge
ORDER
Munley Judge
Presently before the court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Magistrate Judge Daryl F. Bloom recommending that dismissed Defendant Fidelity D&D Bancorp, Inc's (“Bancorp”) motion to impose False Claims Act prevailing party fees on the Patel Plaintiffs be denied without prejudice. (Doc. 136). No objections to the R&R have been filed and the time for such filing has passed.
In deciding whether to adopt the report and recommendation when no timely objection is filed, the court must determine if a review of the record evidences plain error or manifest injustice. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), 1983 Advisory Committee Notes (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record to accept the recommendation”); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Sullivan v. Cuyler, 723 F.2d 1077, 1085 (3d Cir. 1983).
In the present R&R, Magistrate Judge Bloom noted that, under the law, a fee petitioner must submit evidence supporting the hours worked and the rates claimed and, in support of the instant motion, Bancorp failed to do so. Accordingly, the magistrate judge recommended denying the motion without prejudice so that Bankcorp may have the opportunity to present supporting evidence. After review, the court thus finds neither clear error on the face of the record nor a manifest injustice, and therefore, the court shall accept the R&R and adopt it in its entirety. It is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1) The R&R (Doc. 136) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and
2) Bancorp's motion to impose False Claims Act prevailing party fees on the Patel Plaintiffs (Doc. 123) is DENIED without prejudice.