to vacate did not delay rendition of the trial court’s earlier order ratifying the hearing officer's recommended order. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h) (2007) (providing that a motion “to vacate an order based on the recommendations of a hearing officer in accordance with Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.491” delays rendition of any final order). 3 .A litigant cannot expand the time for seeking review of a non-final order (e.g., an order on a discovery motion, which is one way to characterize what the petitioner seeks review of here) by filing a petition for writ of certio-rari addressed to an order on a motion for rehearing of an earlier non-final order that the petitioner failed to challenge in a timely manner. See, e.g., Blades v. Henry, 720 So.2d 323, 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>); Bensonhurst Drywall, Inc. v. Ledesma, 583
holding that the filing of a motion for reconsideration does not toll the period for seeking judicial review of the underlying order holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable holding petitioner cannot circumvent time requirements for seeking certiorari review of an order denying a motion for a protective order by filing a successive motion seeking the same relief and seeking certiorari review that is timely only with respect to the order denying the second motion holding that an order denying a motion to vacate a  1782 order and denying a motion to quash the subpoena was immediately appealable recognizing that an order denying a motion to modify a family court order where the motion is based on changed factual or legal circumstances is appealable as a special order after final judgment