Lightsey v. Beaulieu Group, LLC
Filing
40
OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas' Final Report and Recommendation 38 and administratively closing this action during the pendency of Defendants bankruptcy action. The parties shall notify the Court promptly once the bankruptcy court grants relief from the automatic stay or the stay otherwise lapses. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 3/21/18. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
SA’QUAN LIGHTSEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
1:16-cv-4292-WSD
BEAULIEU GROUP, LLC,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas’
Final Report and Recommendation [38] (“R&R”), recommending this action be
administratively closed pending Defendant Beaulieu Group, LLC’s (“Defendant”)
bankruptcy proceedings.
I.
BACKGROUND
On November 17, 2016, Plaintiff Sa’Quan Lightsey (“Plaintiff”) filed his
Complaint [1] against Defendant, alleging violation of Plaintiff’s rights under the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12111 et seq.
On July 21, 2017, Defendant filed its Suggestion of Bankruptcy and Notice
of Automatic Stay [37], notifying the Court that Defendant filed a petition for
relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 et
seq., in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia,
Rome Division.
On February 16, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued her R&R. In it, she
recommends that the Court administratively close this action pending the outcome
of the bankruptcy proceedings filed by Defendant. No party filed objections to the
R&R.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams
v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
No party objects to the R&R, and the Court thus conducts a plain error review of
the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983).
B.
Analysis
A debtor’s filing of a petition under the Bankruptcy Code operates as an
automatic stay of the “commencement or continuation . . . of a judicial,
administrative, or other action or proceeding against the debtor that was or could
have been commenced before the commencement of the case under this title, or to
2
recover a claim against the debtor that arose before the commencement of the case
under [the bankruptcy code].” See 11 U.S.C. § 363(a)(1). In light of Defendant’s
Notice of Bankruptcy, this action is stayed. The Magistrate Judge recommends
administratively closing this action until the stay is lifted. The Court finds no plain
error in this finding and recommendation. Slay, 714 F.2d at 1095. Accordingly,
this action is administratively closed.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas’
Final Report and Recommendation [38] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is ADMINISTRATIVELY
CLOSED during the pendency of Defendant’s bankruptcy action. The parties
shall notify the Court promptly once the bankruptcy court grants relief from the
automatic stay or the stay otherwise lapses.
SO ORDERED this 21st day of March, 2018.
3
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?