SMITH v. APPLE, INC.

Filing 64

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S 63 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - The court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Filing No. 63) and REMANDS this matter back to the Hancock County Circuit Court. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 44) is DENIED AS MOOT. Final Judgment shall accompany this order separately. SEE REPORT. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 4/3/2019.(JRB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
GREGORY W. SMITH,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
APPLE, INC.,
Defendant.

1:17-cv-04694-RLY-MJD

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On September 18, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued an order to show cause as to
why this matter should not be remanded back to state court because the amount in
controversy appeared not to meet the threshold for diversity jurisdiction. (Filing No. 41).
After considering the responses, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation, recommending that this case be remanded for lack of jurisdiction.
(Filing No. 63). Neither party filed an objection. Consequently, the court reviews the
Report and Recommendation for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734,
739 (7th Cir. 1999). After reviewing the parties’ arguments and the Report and
Recommendation, this court is satisfied that the Magistrate Judge did not commit clear
error.
Therefore, the court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Filing No. 63)
and REMANDS this matter back to the Hancock County Circuit Court. Defendant’s

1

Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 44) is DENIED AS MOOT. Final Judgment
shall accompany this order separately.

SO ORDERED this 3rd day of April 2019.

Distributed Electronically to Registered Counsel of Record.

2