Jetchill Ltd. v. Shenzhen Jiarui Minghui Trading Co., Ltd. et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 1:25-cv-23377-LEIBOWITZ/LOUIS
JETCHILL LTD,
Plaintiff,
v.
SHENZHEN JIARUI MINGHUI
TRADING CO., LTD and EXPLONOVA
STORE,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
THIS MATTER was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis for a
report and recommendation on Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 21]. [See ECF
No. 34]. 	After conducting an evidentiary hearing and considering post-hearing briefing, Judge Louis
recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion be DENIED. [See ECF Nos. 74, 77, 79, 80, 89]. No objections
were filed during the objection period. After careful review of the Report and Recommendation, the
Motion, the parties’ papers, the relevant portions of the record, and the governing law, the Court
ADOPTS and AFFIRMS the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 89].
LEGAL STANDARD
After conducting a review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept,
reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party
files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by a magistrate judge, the district court must
conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. 	Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567, 1576
(11th Cir. 1992). The district court reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an
objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty.
Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019). To the extent a party fails to object
to parts of the magistrate judge’s report, those portions are reviewed for clear error. Macort v. Prem.
Case 1:25-cv-23377-DSL Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2025 Page 1 of 2

2
Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (quoting Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th
Cir. 1999)).
CONCLUSION
In the absence of any objection to the R&R, the Court’s own review finds no error. Indeed,
the Court thanks Magistrate Judge Louis for her clear, cogent, and thorough R&R; the undersigned
fully agrees with its reasoning, findings, and conclusions. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND
ADJUDGED as follows:
1. 	The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 89] is ADOPTED
AND AFFIRMED and fully incorporated into this Order for all purposes.
2. 	Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 21] is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on December 12, 2025.
cc: 	counsel of record
Case 1:25-cv-23377-DSL Document 92 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/12/2025 Page 2 of 2