Universa Investments L.P. v. Borodich et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
CASE NO.: 1:18-cv-24286-GAYLES/SHAW-WILDER
UNIVERSA INVESTMENTS L.P.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALEXANDER BORODICH, an individual,
and UNIVERSA CORPORATION, LTD.,
a foreign company,
Defendants.
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Detra Shaw-Wilder (the “Report”) [ECF No. 42] regarding Defendants Alexander Borodich and
Universa Corporation Ltd.’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Vacate Under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 60(b)(4) (“Motion”) [ECF No. 35]. On July 24, 2025, Plaintiff Universa
Investments L.P. (“Plaintiff”) filed a Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion. [ECF No.
39]. On February 18, 2026, Judge Shaw-Wilder issued her Report recommending that the Motion
be granted. [ECF No. 42]. On February 25, 2026, Plaintiff timely objected to the Report
(“Objection”). [ECF No. 45].
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
______________________________/
Case 1:18-cv-24286-DPG Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2026 Page 1 of 2

2
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, and Plaintiff’s Objection, and agrees with Judge Shaw-Wilder’s well-reasoned
analysis and conclusion that the Motion should be granted.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) 	Magistrate Judge Shaw-Wilder’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 42], is
ADOPTED in full;
(2) 	Defendants’ Motion, [ECF No. 35], is GRANTED;
(3) 	The Clerk’s Default [ECF No. 13] and the Final Default Judgment [ECF Nos. 19, 20]
are hereby vacated.
(4) 	Plaintiff shall properly effectuate service on the Defendants within ninety (90) days
of this Order.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 20th day of March 2026.
________________________________
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:18-cv-24286-DPG Document 46 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2026 Page 2 of 2