Ward v. CM Securities LLC

Filing 31

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 30 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent that it is not inconsistent with this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Brenda Ward's 28 Motion for Default Judgment be GR ANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Default Judgment be entered on Plaintiff's behalf (and against Defendant) in the amount awarded by the Arbitration panel: $458,659, comprised of $330,000 of compensatory damages, interest of $12,859, costs of $300, and attorney's fees of $115,500. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 9/23/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

BRENDA WARD,
4

Plaintiff,

5

vs.

6

CM SECURITIES, LLC,
7

Defendant.

8

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:13-cv-02208-GMN-NJK
ORDER

9
10

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States

11

Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe, (ECF No. 30), which recommends that Plaintiff Brenda

12

Ward

13

Default Judgment (ECF No. 28) be GRANTED.
A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a

14

United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1 4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);

15

D. Nev. R. IB 3 2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo

16

determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject,

17

or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

18

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3 2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is

19
20

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a

21

district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where

22

no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122

23

(9th Cir. 2003).

24

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.

25

Accordingly,

Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 30) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent that it is not inconsistent with this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff
Judgment (ECF No. 28) be GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
(and against Defendant) in the amount awarded by the arbitration panel: $458,659, comprised

7
8
9

of $115,500.
DATED this 23rd day of September, 2015.

10
11
12
13

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2