Klutnick et al v. Klutnick
Filing
4
OPINION (See Written Opinion): It is ordered that: 1) The Report and Recommendation (d/e 3) is ACCEPTED by the Court. (2) Plaintiffs' Complaint (d/e 1) is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. (3) This case is CLOSED. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 6/21/2011. (VM, ilcd)
E-FILED
Tuesday, 21 June, 2011 03:30:24 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
ALBERT A. KLUTNICK and
BARBARA J. KLUTNICK,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JAMES J. KLUTNICK,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
) No. 10-CV-3324
)
)
)
)
OPINION
A Report and Recommendation (d/e 3) was entered by the Magistrate Judge
in the above cause on June 3, 2011. More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed
since the filing of the Recommendation and no objections have been made. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is accepted by
the Court. See Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd, 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (d/e 3) is ACCEPTED by the Court.
(2) Plaintiffs’ Complaint (d/e 1) is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF
PROSECUTION.
(3) This case is CLOSED.
ENTERED: June 21, 2011.
FOR THE COURT:
s/ Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES 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?