Rickey Martin v. Lens.com, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted and affirmed a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation denying Lens.com, Inc.’s motion to strike Plaintiff’s untimely disclosed class-certification expert. The court overruled the defendant’s objections, finding that the defendant waived its argument concerning a reply brief by not seeking leave to file a sur-reply and that the expert’s report was neither important to class certification nor prejudicial because the court would not rely on it. The order was entered on March 17, 2026.

Holdings

1. Defendant waived the objection by failing to seek leave to file a sur-reply despite claiming that it lacked an opportunity to respond.
2. Exclusion was not required because the untimely disclosure was substantially justified and harmless, and the expert's opinion was not important to the court's class-certification determination.
3. The report and recommendation was adopted and affirmed, and Defendant's motion to strike was denied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendant waived its objection to Plaintiff's failure to address alleged prejudice from new expert evidence in a reply brief by failing to seek leave to file a sur-reply.
2. Whether Plaintiff's untimely disclosure of the class-certification expert report required exclusion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1).
3. Whether the magistrate judge correctly determined that the late disclosure was substantially justified and harmless, and that the expert report had no importance to the class-certification decision.

Disposition

affirmed