Greentree Financial Group, Inc.,v. World Nation Live Entertainment, Inc.

Filing 31

ORDER adopting #27 Report and Recommendation; This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to effectuate service and/or prosecute. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 9/23/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

GREENTREE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.,
4

Plaintiff,

5

vs.

6
7

WORLD NATION LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

8

Defendant.

9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-00972-GMN-NJK
ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Objection, (ECF No. 28), filed by Plaintiff Greentree

10
11

Financial Group, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), which objects to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Nancy J.

12

Koppe’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF No. 27). Interest Party Sheldon Drobny

13

filed a Response to the Objection, (ECF No. 29), and Plaintiff filed a Supplement, (ECF No.

14

30). For the reasons stated herein, the R&R is ADOPTED in full.

15

I.

16

BACKGROUND
On July 24, 2017, the Court denied Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Default Judgment,

17

(ECF No. 23), for failure to satisfy its burden of showing proper service had been effectuated.

18

(Order, ECF No. 25). The Court ordered that, to the extent Plaintiff continued to seek default

19

judgment, it had to file its second renewed motion for default judgment by August 7, 2017.

20

(Id.). Plaintiff failed to file a motion by this date.

21

On August 16, 2017, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, requiring Plaintiff to

22

demonstrate why the case “should not be dismissed for failure to effectuate service and/or

23

failure to prosecute.” (Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 26). The Court gave Plaintiff until

24

August 23, 2017, to file its response. (Id.). In the alternative, the Court permitted Plaintiff to

25

file a second renewed motion for default judgment by this date. (Id.). Plaintiff failed to do
either. Accordingly, on August 25, 2017, Judge Koppe issued an R&R recommending that
Page 1 of 3

1

Plaintiff’s case be dismissed for failure to effectuate service and/or failure to prosecute. (R&R,

2

ECF No. 27).

3

II.

4

LEGAL STANDARD
A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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

9

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b).

10
11

III.

DISCUSSION
In its Objection, Plaintiff argues that the Court should set aside the R&R because there

12

exists excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 6(b) for its failure to

13

respond to Judge Koppe’s prior Orders. (Obj. 4:2–5:28, ECF No. 28). Under FRCP 6(b), the

14

Court may, for good cause, grant an extension of time “on a motion made after the time has

15

expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B).

16

According to Plaintiff, “[w]hen Plaintiff reviewed the docket after the July 27, 2017

17

order, it became clear that World Nation’s registered agent Clifford Neuman had resigned as its

18

registered agent on May 16, 2016.” (Id. 4:9–11). Based on this discovery, Plaintiff claims that

19

“it was unable to answer the Court’s Order by the due date of August 23, 2017 as it was not

20

possible to remedy this service issue that quickly.” (Id. 4:16–18). Plaintiff’s argument fails for

21

numerous reasons.

22

First, to date, Plaintiff has not filed a motion to extend time as required under FRCP 6(b)

23

and the local rules. The instant Objection is Plaintiff’s first mention of any need for additional

24

time. Second, Plaintiff’s explanation that it was “unable to answer the Court’s Order” is

25

without merit. While Plaintiff claims it did not have enough time to properly effectuate service

Page 2 of 3

1

of process before the Court’s August 23, 2017 deadline, that is not a reason for failing to

2

respond to the Court’s Orders and not timely seeking an extension of deadlines. Indeed,

3

Plaintiff had two separate opportunities to comply with Judge Koppe’s rulings and failed to

4

abide by both deadlines. (See Order, ECF No. 25) (permitting Plaintiff to file a renewed

5

motion for default judgment); (Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 26) (directing Plaintiff to

6

demonstrate why the case should not be dismissed “for failure to effectuate service and/or

7

failure to prosecute”). Whether it was “possible to remedy” the service issues by the show

8

cause deadline is a separate issue from Plaintiff’s obligation to comply with the Court’s Orders.

9

Accordingly, the Court finds no basis to depart from the R&R.1

10

IV.

CONCLUSION

11

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the R&R, (ECF No. 27), is ADOPTED in FULL.

12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for

13

failure to effectuate service and/or failure to prosecute.

14

23
DATED this _____ day of September, 2019.

15
16
17

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

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Plaintiff argues that adopting the R&R would “foreclose [its] ability to recover on a legitimate breach of
contract claim” and also “punish [it] due to no fault of its own.” (Obj. 5:16–18). Plaintiff is mistaken. Adopting
the R&R results in dismissal without prejudice, and thus Plaintiff is not foreclosed from pursuing its claims after
complying with proper procedures.
1

25

Page 3 of 3