MCM ENTERTAINMENT, INC.
v.
DIAZ WORLD TRADE GROUP, INC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court for the Southern District of Florida reviewed a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on a Motion to Dismiss certain counterclaims. The Court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the motion as to Counterclaim V and deny it as to Counterclaims III and IV.
The District Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation in full, granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss as to Third Amended Counterclaim V and denying it as to Counterclaims III and IV.
[1] A district court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which specific objections are made.
[2] Portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which no specific objections are made are reviewed only for clear error.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge reports and the district court's authority over such recommendations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs MCM Entertainment, Inc. filed a Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Third Amended Counterclaims III, IV, and V. Magistrate Judge Torres issued a …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clear Error Review cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres' Report and Recommendation on Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Third Amended Counterclaims III, IV, and V (the “Report”) [ECF No. 284]. On July 29, 2025, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending that Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 272] be denied as to Counterclaims III and IV and granted as to Counterclaim V. [ECF No. 284]. On August 12, 2025, Plaintiffs timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 290]. On August 20, 2025, Defendants timely objected to the Report. [ECF No. 293].¹
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The objected portions of the report and recommendation
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 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record, including the Report, the Motion to Dismiss, and the parties' objections. The Court agrees with Judge Torres' well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the Motion to Dismiss should be granted in part and denied in part.
Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 284], is ADOPTED in full.
(2) Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No. 272], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion to Dismiss is granted as to Third Amended Counterclaim V and denied for Counterclaims III and IV.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 25th day of August 2025.
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
- Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)