Price Simms Holdings LLC, et al., v. Candle3, LLC

Filing 144

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 4/27/21 ADOPTING in full 140 Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiffs' 130 Motion for Default Judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are AWARDED final judgment in the amount of $3,340,256. Candle3's 59 counterclaims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PRICE SIMMS HOLDINGS, LLC, et al., 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 No. 2:18-cv-1851-WBS-KJN ORDER CANDLE3, LLC, 15 (ECF Nos. 130, 140, 141) Defendant. 16 17 On April 6, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 18 140), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 19 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No objections were 20 filed. Accordingly, the court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 21 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 22 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 23 1983). 24 25 26 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 140) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 28 2. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 130) is GRANTED; 1 1 3. Plaintiffs are awarded final judgment in the amount of $3,340,256; and 2 4. Candle3’s counterclaims (ECF No. 59) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 3 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Dated: April 27, 2021 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

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?