Abet Justice L.L.C. et al v. First America Trustee Servicing Solutions, L.L.C. et al

Filing 157

ERROR: Docketed in error by clerk's office. CORRECTION: Document terminated. ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Adopting 121 Report and Recommendation. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Abet Justice, L.L.C.'s claims be, and the same hereby are, DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE consistent with the foregoing. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/26/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 ABET JUSTICE LLC, et al., 8 Plaintiff(s), 9 10 11 Case No. 2:14-CV-908 JCM (GWF) ORDER v. FIRST AMERICA TRUSTEE SERVICING SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al., Defendant(s). 12 13 Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Foley’s report and recommendation 14 15 16 17 recommending that plaintiff Abet Justice, L.L.C.’s (“Abet Justice”) claims be dismissed with prejudice based on plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s order to obtain successor counsel (“R&R”). (ECF No. 121). Pro se plaintiff Guetatchew Fikrou filed an objection. (ECF No. 123). In plaintiff Fikrou’s objection, he asserts that he is seeking an attorney to represent him on 18 19 20 21 this case and requests additional time to do so. (ECF No. 123). However, the magistrate’s R&R recommends dismissal of plaintiff Abet Justice’s claims, not of plaintiff Fikrou’s claims. (ECF No. 121). Plaintiff Abet Justice has not filed an objection. The deadline to file an objection has since 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge passed. This court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 1 Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at 2 all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 3 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a 4 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United 5 States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review 6 employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no 7 objections were made). 8 Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine 9 whether to adopt the R&R. Upon reviewing the recommendation and underlying briefs, the court 10 finds that good cause appears to adopt the R&R. On September 8, 2016, plaintiff Fikrou filed a substitution of representation requesting to 11 12 represent his grantor, plaintiff Abet Justice. (ECF No. 130). 13 While plaintiff Fikrou is entitled to appear pro se on his own behalf, he has no authority to 14 appear as an attorney on plaintiff Abet Justice’s behalf or on behalf of anyone else. A corporation 15 is not permitted to appear in federal court unless it is represented by counsel. United States v. High 16 Country Broad. Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993). Although a non-attorney may appear 17 on his own behalf to represent himself, that privilege is personal to him. C.E. Pope Equity Trust 18 v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 1987). An individual has no authority to appear as 19 an attorney for anyone other than himself. Id. 20 Plaintiff Abet Justice failed to respond to the magistrate’s order to show cause, wherein it 21 was cautioned that failure to timely respond would result in the imposition of sanctions. (ECF No. 22 121 at 3). To date, plaintiff Abet Justice still has not obtained successor counsel as ordered by 23 Magistrate Judge Foley. 24 In light of the foregoing, the court will adopt the R&R in its entirety and dismiss plaintiff 25 Abet Justice’s claims with prejudice. As the R&R pertained solely to plaintiff Abet Justice’s 26 claims, this order likewise pertains solely to plaintiff Abet Justice’s claims and not those of plaintiff 27 Fikrou. 28 ... James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge -2- 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Magistrate Judge 3 Foley’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 121) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in its 4 entirety. 5 6 7 8 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Abet Justice, L.L.C.’s claims be, and the same hereby are, DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE consistent with the foregoing. DATED September 26, 2016. __________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge -3-

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?