Musashi AZ, LLC v. MarineMax East, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 1: 24-CV-24250-DPG
MUSASHI AZ, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
MARINEMAX EAST, INC.,
FORTUN INSURANCE, LLC, and
AZIMUT BENETTI SERVICE USA, INC.,
Defendants.
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Detra Shaw-Wilder (the “Report”), [ECF No. 96], on Defendant Fortun
Insurance, LLC’s (“Fortun”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint and
Demand for Jury Trial (“Motion”), [ECF No. 65]. On July 21, 2025, Plaintiff Musashi AZ, LLC
(“Plaintiff”) filed its Response in Opposition to Fortun’s Motion [ECF No. 69]. On July 28, 2025,
Fortun filed its Reply. [ECF No. 71]. On February 23, 2026, Judge Shaw-Wilder issued her Report
recommending that Fortun’s Motion be denied, [ECF No. 96]. Neither party objected to the Report.
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.,
______________________________/
Case 1:24-cv-24250-DPG Document 102 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2026 Page 1 of 2

2
199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781,
784 (11th Cir. 2006). Because neither party has objected to any portion of the Report, the Court
reviewed the Report for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Shaw-
Wilder’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Fortun’s Motion [ECF No. 65] should be
denied.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) 	The Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 96], is ADOPTED in full.
(2) 	Defendant Fortun Insurance, LLC’s Motion, [ECF No. 65], is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 12th day of March 2026.
________________________________
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:24-cv-24250-DPG Document 102 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2026 Page 2 of 2