BMW of North America, LLC v. Kortek Services, Inc. et al

Filing 21

ORDER Accepting 19 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 3/7/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 ***** 9 10 11 12 13 BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) KORTEK SERVICES, INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________ ) 2:11-cv-01909-LRH-PAL ORDER 14 15 Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen 16 (#191) entered on February 17, 2012, recommending that default judgment be entered against 17 Defendants unless they filed the Certificate of Interested Parties in this matter no later than February 18 28, 2012. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. The action was referred 19 to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)B and Local Rule 1B 1-4 of the Rules of 20 Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. 21 The Court has conducted its de novo review in this case and determines that the Magistrate 22 Judge’s Report and Recommendation (#19) entered on February 17, 2012, can now be considered as 23 moot given that Defendants filed their Certificate of Interested Parties (#20) on February 21, 2012.. 24 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (#19) 25 26 1 Refers to court’s docket number. 1 entered on February 17, 2012, is accepted by the Court. The Defendants and their counsel are 2 admonished to carefully comply with all procedural rules. Any further violations will be viewed 3 strictly by the Court. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 DATED this 7th day of March, 2012. 6 7 8 9 _______________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2

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?