Levitte v. Google Inc.

Filing 90

Statement of Non-Opposition to 88 Motion for Administrative Relief To Modify Case Management Schedule filed by Hal K. Levitte. (Jonckheer, Willem) (Filed on 6/24/2010) Modified on 6/24/2010,(counsel failed to properly link to motion.) (cv, COURT STAFF).

Lev i tte v. Google Inc.

Do c. 90

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 v. EDWARD EUGENE RICKS, et al., Defendant. _________________________________ ALAN A BRADFORD, a California corporation, Cross-Complainant, v. EDWARD EUGENE RICKS, et al., Cross-Defendants / TRUSTEES OF THE BRICKLAYERS LOCAL 7 PENSION TRUST, et al., Plaintiffs, No.02-01059 CW ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION RE: MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

14
For the Northern District of California

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Chen's Report and Recommendation Re: Cross-Complainant's Motion for Default Judgment. No objections to the Report were filed. The Court

finds the Report correct, well-reasoned and thorough, and adopts it in every respect except that the Court calculates the interest as of September 1, 2003. Accordingly,

Default judgment is entered in favor of Alan A. Bradford against E & T as a partnership and Edward, Lynda and Ted Ricks

Dockets.Justia.com

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 27 28

as individuals for a total judgment of $125,544.93 (owed as of September 1, 2003). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/1/03

/s/ CLAUDIA WILKEN CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge