Sananikone v. United States of America

Filing 83

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 8/5/10 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 6/15/10 81 are ADOPTED; Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff's Application for default against counterclaim defendant Paul Ta 75 , 77 is DENIED without prejudice. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
Sananikone v. United States of America Doc. 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 On June 15, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 1 Dockets.Justia.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PUONGPUN SANANIKONE, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, vs. PAUL TA, et al., Counterclaim-Defendants __________________________________/ No. 2:07-cv-01434-MCE-KJN ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed June 15, 2010, are ADOPTED; 2. Defendant/Counterclaim plaintiff's application for default judgement against counterclaim defendant Paul Ta (Dkt. Nos. 75 and 77) is denied without prejudice. Dated: August 5, 2010 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?