# WBSY Licensing, LLC v. Duval County School Board

> District Court, M.D. Florida · May 31, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10110230

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, M.D. Florida
- **Decided:** May 31, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10110230

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

WBSY LICENSING, LLC,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:21-cv-805-MMH-JBT

DUVAL COUNTY SCHOOL
BOARD,

Defendant.
/

O R D E R

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation
(Dkt. No. 27; Report), entered by the Honorable Joel B. Toomey, United States
Magistrate Judge, on May 10, 2022. In the Report, Judge Toomey recommends
that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Dkt. No. 12) be denied. See
Report at 1, 7. No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time for
doing so has now passed.
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the finding
or recommendations by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific
objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to
conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d
776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the
district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v.
Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 608, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No.
2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).
Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the
Magistrate Judge’s Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and
factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is
hereby
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 27) is ADOPTED as the
opinion of the Court.
2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Dkt. No. 12) is DENIED.
3. Defendant shall have up to and including June 9, 2022, to file an

answer to the Complaint.
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 31st day of May,
2022.

United States District Judge

-2.

ja
Copies to:

Counsel of Record

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10110230. Public record. Not legal advice.