JOHN O'SULLIVAN, Magistrate Judge
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses in Connection with Sanctioned Conduct and Motion (DE # 319, 11/28/05). This matter was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge by the Honorable Ungaro-Benages, United States District Court Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Having carefully considered the filings and applicable law, the undersigned recommends that the Defendant's Motion for Attorney' Fees and Expenses in Connection with Sanctioned Conduct and Motion (DE # 319, 11/28/05) be GRANTED. On December 15, 2005, the plaintiff filed a response indicating that if fees are awarded to the defendant, "the award should be limited to the amount of $212,377 .75, as agreed between the parties." Response at 7.' On December 21, 2005, the defendant filed a reply indicating that "it is appropriate for the Court to enter forthwith a final judgment on the issue of sanctions in favor of the Defendants in the amount of $212,377.75." Reply at 1.
On October 7, 2005, (DE # 312), Judge Ungaro-Benages found that fees are to be awarded to the defendant. The only issue before the undersigned is the appropriate amount of fees to be awarded.
The undersigned has reviewed the supporting documentation and finds that fees and expenses agreed to are reasonable and appropriate in light of the billing rates for those individuals who worked on the case.
RECOMMENDATION
The parties having agreed to the amount, the undersigned hereby respectfully RECOMMENDS that the Defendant's Motion for Attorney' Fees and Expenses in Connection with Sanctioned Conduct and Motion (DE # 319, 11/28/05) be GRANTED in its entirety and that the defendant be awarded $212,377.75 in fees and expenses.
The parties have ten (10) days from the date of receipt of this Report and Recommendation within which to serve and file written objections, if any, with the Honorable Ursula Ungaro-Benages, United States District Court Judge. Failure to file objections timely shall bar the parties from attacking on appeal the factual findings contained herein. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F. 2d 745 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958, 109 S.Ct. 397 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F. 2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).