CASE NO. 03-21303-CIV-UNGARO-BENAGESUnited States District Court, S.D. Florida.
February 18, 2004
ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROWN’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
URSULA UNGARO-BENAGES, District Judge
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Verified Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed August 5, 2003.
THE COURT has considered the motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Magistrate Judge Brown issued a report on January 29, 2004, recommending that Defendant’s motion be granted as to Defendant’s entitlement to attorney’s fees but denied as to the amount of fees to which Defendant is in fact entitled. Neither party has filed timely objections to the report. See Lo Conte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 145 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988) (holding the failure to file timely objections bars the parties from attacking on appeal factual findings). The matter is ripe for disposition.
THE COURT has conducted a de novo review of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Magistrate Brown’s Report is RATIFIED, AFFIRMED, AND APPROVED. Defendant’s Verified Motion for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED as to Defendant’s entitlement to attorney’s fees and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the amount of attorney’s fees to which Plaintiff is entitled. Defendant may file an amended motion for attorney’s fees supported by documentation verifying both the number of hours expended, and the hourly rate charged, by Defendant’s counsel.