Masse v. MSC Cruises, S.A.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 24-61121-CIV-DAMIAN/Strauss
JUSTIN MASSE,
Plaintiff,
v.
MSC CRUISES, S.A.,
Defendant.
_______________________________/
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF NO. 45] AND
GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR COSTS [ECF NO. 42]
THIS 	CAUSE 	is 	before 	the 	Court 	on 	the 	Report 	and 	Recommendation 	on
Defendant’s (Re-Filed) Motion for Costs [ECF No. 42] of United States Magistrate Judge
Jared M. Strauss, entered on February 13, 2026 [ECF No. 45 (“Report”)]. Judge Strauss
recommends that the Court grant in part Defendant’s Motion and award Defendant taxable
costs in the amount of $1,180.75. The parties have not filed objections to the Report, and
the time to do so has passed.1
1 When no party has timely objected, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is
no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s notes (citation omitted). Although Rule 72 itself is silent on
the standard of review, the Supreme Court has acknowledged Congress’s intent was to only
require a de novo review where objections have been properly filed, not when neither party
objects. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress
intended 	to 	require 	district 	court 	review 	of 	a 	magistrate 	[judge]’s 	factual 	or 	legal
conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those
findings.”).
Case 0:24-cv-61121-MD Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2026 Page 1 of 2

2
THE COURT has reviewed the Report, the Motion,2 and the relevant record and
agrees with the reasoning and recommendations set forth therein. Finding no clear error,
this Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS Judge Strauss’s Report [ECF No. 45]. Accordingly, it
is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. 	Defendant’s Motion for Costs [ECF No. 42] is GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART.
2. 	Defendant is awarded $1,180.75 in taxable costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, plus
interest in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in the Southern District of Florida, this 24th
day of March, 2026.
________________________________________
MELISSA DAMIAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: 	Counsel of record
2 As noted in the Magistrate Judge’s Report, Plaintiff did not file a response to the
Motion.
Case 0:24-cv-61121-MD Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2026 Page 2 of 2