Wabash Power Equipment Co et al v. BTU State Line LLC et al

Filing 103

ORDER: Court ACCEPTS #102 Report and Recommendations in its entirety and thereby grants #90 Motion for Default Judgment and DIRECTS the Clerk to ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiffs Wabash Power Equipment Co. and Nickelson Industrial Service, Inc., and against Defendants BTU State Line, LLC, BTU Solutions DE, LLC, and State Line Energy, LLC, in the sum of $5,016,105.69. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 12/14/15. (mc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
WABASH POWER EQUIPMENT, CO., and
NICKELSON INDUSTRIAL SERVICE, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BTU STATE LINE, LLC,
BTU SOLUTIONS DE, LLC, and
STATE LINE ENERGY, LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO.: 2:13-CV-202-TLS

ORDER
On August 31, 2015, this Court referred the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment to
Magistrate Judge John E. Martin for review, to conduct any and all necessary evidentiary
hearings, and to issue a report and recommendation that includes proposed findings of fact and
recommendations for the disposition of the Plaintiffs’ Motion.
On November 24, 2015, Magistrate Judge Martin issued a Report and Recommendation
setting forth a recommendation that the Court grant the Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default
[ECF No. 90]. The Report recommended that this Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs
Wabash Power Equipment Co. and Nickelson Industrial Service, Inc., and against Defendants
BTU State Line, LLC, BTU Solutions DE, LLC, and State Line Energy, LLC., in the sum of
$5,016,105.69 for claims that they breached express warranties to the Plaintiffs, committed fraud
in the inducement, and committed deception in contravention of the Indiana Crime Victim Relief
Act for actions in connection with the auction of equipment from a defunct electric generating
plant.
This Court’s review of the Magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is governed

by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) which provides in part:
A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is
made. A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
findings and recommendations made by the magistrate. The judge may also
receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with
instructions.
Objections to the Magistrate’s Judge’s Report and Recommendations must be made within
fourteen days of service of a copy of the Report. Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No party has filed an
objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
Upon review of the parties’ submissions and the Report and Recommendation, the Court
ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 102] in its entirety and thereby:
(1)

GRANTS the Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default [Judgment ] [ECF No. 102];

(2)

DIRECTS the Clerk to ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiffs Wabash Power
Equipment Co. and Nickelson Industrial Service, Inc., and against Defendants
BTU State Line, LLC, BTU Solutions DE, LLC, and State Line Energy, LLC, in
the sum of $5,016,105.69.

SO ORDERED on December 14, 2015.
s/ Theresa L. Springmann
THERESA L. SPRINGMANN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2