Davis et al v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation et al

Filing 455

*VACATED by #458 - ORDER that the November 9, 2017 Report and Recommendation (Doc. #454 ) is ADOPTED. Defendant Crane Co.'s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #415 ) is GRANTED. Summary Judgment is awarded in favor of Defendant Crane Co. and against Plaintiffs Bobby Len Davis and Becky Davis. Defendant Warren Pumps, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #421 ) is GRANTED. Summary Judgment is awarded in favor of Warren Pumps, LLC, and against Plaintiffs Bobby Len Davis and Becky Davis. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and shall then close its file in this matter. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 1/10/2018. (SIB) Modified on 1/11/2018 (SIB).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9
10
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, et al., )
)
)
Defendants.
)
Bobby Len Davis and Becky Davis,
11
12
13
14
15

No. CV 14-2288-TUC-CKJ (LCK)
ORDER

16

On November 9, 2017, Magistrate Judge Lynette C. Kimmins issued a Report and

17

Recommendation (Doc. 454) in which she recommended Defendant Crane Co.’s Motion for

18

Summary Judgment (Doc. 415) and Defendant Warren Pumps, LLC’s Motion for Summary

19

Judgment (Doc. 421) be granted. The Report and Recommendation notified the parties they

20

had 14 days from the date of the Report and Recommendation to file any objections. No

21

objections have been filed.

22

The standard of review that is applied to a magistrate judge’s report and

23

recommendation is dependent upon whether a party files objections – the Court need not

24

review portions of a report to which a party does not object. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,

25

150 (1985). However, the Court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s

26

disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or

27

modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the

28

magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

Nonetheless, “while the statute does not require the judge to review an issue de novo if no

2

objections are filed, it does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or

3

at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

4

The Court has reviewed and considered the pending motions (Docs. 415, 421), the

5

responses (Docs. 431, 433), the replies (Docs. 445, 446), the statements of facts (Docs. 416,

6

422, 432, 434), and the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 454).

7

Accordingly, after an independent review, IT IS ORDERED:

8

1.

The November 9, 2017 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 454) is ADOPTED.

9

2.

Defendant Crane Co.’s Motion for

10
11
12

Summary Judgment (Doc. 415) is

GRANTED.
3.

Summary Judgment is awarded in favor of Defendant Crane Co. and against

Plaintiffs Bobby Len Davis and Becky Davis.

13

4.

14

is GRANTED.

15

5.

16
17
18
19

Defendant Warren Pumps, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 421)

Summary Judgment is awarded in favor of Warren Pumps, LLC, and against

Plaintiffs Bobby Len Davis and Becky Davis.
6.

The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and shall then close its file in this

matter.
DATED this 10th day of January, 2018.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-