BGC Partners, Inc. et al v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc. et al

Filing 229

ORDER that 221 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' proposed claim for breach of fiduciary duty and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty is DENIED, with prejudice, because P laintiffs waived those claims and is judicially estopped from alleging them in an amended complaint. The claims are also preempted to the extent they are based on the misappropriation of trade secrets. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' prop osed claim for violation of the Nevada RICO statute is DENIED, with prejudice, to the extent that a state law RICO claim may not be predicated on the misappropriation of trade secrets. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' proposed addition of Western Alliance Commercial Inc. (WCA) as an additional defendant to their proposed claim for tortious interference with contractual relations is DENIED, with prejudice, because a person cannot be liable for intentionally interfering with its own contract. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 2/11/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

BGC PARTNERS, INC., et al.,

10

Plaintiffs,
ORDER

11
12

Case No. 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-GWF

v.
AVISON YOUNG (CANADA), INC., et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 221] of

15
16

the Honorable George Foley, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, entered January 7, 2019.

17

A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

18

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific

19

written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §

20

636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is

21

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed

22

findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local

23

Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct

24

“any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge.

25

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due

26

by January 21, 2019. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this

27

case and concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations.

28

...

1
2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 221]
is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ proposed claim for breach of fiduciary duty

4

and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty is DENIED, with prejudice, because Plaintiffs

5

waived those claims and is judicially estopped from alleging them in an amended complaint. The

6

claims are also preempted to the extent they are based on the misappropriation of trade secrets.

7

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ proposed claim for violation of the Nevada

8

RICO statute is DENIED, with prejudice, to the extent that a state law RICO claim may not be

9

predicated on the misappropriation of trade secrets.

10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ proposed addition of Western Alliance

11

Commercial Inc. (WCA) as an additional defendant to their proposed claim for tortious

12

interference with contractual relations is DENIED, with prejudice, because a person cannot be

13

liable for intentionally interfering with its own contract.

14
15

DATED: February 11, 2019.
_____________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-