Alfa Vision Insurance Corporation v. Amaya-Mata et al
ORDER ADOPTING 57 Report and Recommendations; Further, denying without prejudice to their refiling 49 Motion for Default Judgment and 53 Motion to Amend/Correct; Motion for Default Judgment. This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Mark E. Ford. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on March 12, 2018. (mjm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
ALFA VISION INSURANCE CORPORATION
ADELE AMAYA-MATA, et al.
The Court has received a report and recommendations (Doc. 57) from United States
Magistrate Judge Mark E. Ford on Plaintiff’s pending motions (Docs. 49, 53) for default judgment.
Plaintiff’s counsel has informed the Court that Plaintiff does not object to the report and
recommendations, and the Court will review the report and recommendations even though the
deadline to object has not yet passed.
The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate’s report and recommendation. The
Magistrate recommends denial of the motions without prejudice to refiling so that Alfa may
support its alleged entitlement to default judgment, and so that “a general guardian, committee,
conservator, or other such representative” may enter an appearance for the minor Defendants. The
report and recommendation is proper and contains no error, and is ADOPTED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions for default judgment (Docs. 49,
53) are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THEIR REFILING.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Mark E. Ford
under 28 § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) for resolution of future matters arising in this case, including
entry of an order appointing a guardian ad litem or another appropriate order under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 17(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of March, 2018.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?