Shupe et al v. Cricket Communications Incorporated

Filing 42

ORDER granting 29 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice. Ordered Magistrate Judge Markovich's 39 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment. The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Markovich to address any post-judgment motions. Signed by Judge James A Soto on 12/10/2014.(BAR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
Richard Shupe,
9
Plaintiff,
10
vs.
11
12

Cricket Communications, Inc.
Defendant.

13
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 13-1052-TUC-JAS (EJM)
ORDER

15
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge
16
Eric J. Markovich. In his Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Markovich
17
recommends granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss. As the Court finds that the Report and
18

Recommendation correctly resolved the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff’s objections are denied.1

19
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
20
(1) Magistrate Judge Markovich’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is accepted and
21
adopted.
22
(2) The motion to dismiss (Doc. 29) is granted and this case is dismissed with prejudice.
23
(3) The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment.
24
(3) This case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Markovich to address any post-judgment
25
26
27
28

1

The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to
portions of the Report and Recommendation. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739
(7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).

1

motions such as Defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees.

2
3

DATED this 10th day of December, 2014.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-