Catlin Specialty Insurance Company v. Jafrum International, Inc. et al

Filing 46

ORDER denying as moot 25 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; accepting and adopting 37 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 3/7/2016. (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-CV-00607-GCM-DCK
CATLIN SPECIALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TEGOL, INC.
HELMET VENTURE, INC.
JAFRUM INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

)
)
)

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Third Party Defendant Consolidated Marking
Group, Inc. D/B/A Charlotte Insurance’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 25).
On September 14, 2015, Magistrate Judge David Keesler issued a Memorandum and
Recommendation recommending that this Court deny the Motion as moot because the Amended
Third Party Complaint would supersede the Complaint on which the Motion was based. (Doc.
No. 37) No objections were filed. This civil action was stayed between October 7, 2015 and
February 16, 2016, but on February 7, 2016 Judge Keesler denied the parties’ Joint Motion for
Extension of Temporary Stay. (Doc. No. 45) For the reasons set forth below, the Court
ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Memorandum and Recommendation.
The Federal Magistrate Act provides that “a district court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specific proposed findings or recommendations
to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Canby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir.
1983). “By contrast, in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a
de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the

record in order to accept the recommendation.’” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,
416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Note). Here,
no party filed an objection to the Memorandum and Recommendation, and the time for doing so
has expired.
Accordingly, after a careful review of the record in this case, the Court finds that the
Magistrate Judge’s findings of fact are supported by the record and his conclusions of law are
consistent with and supported by current case law. Thus, the Memorandum and
Recommendation is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. Third Party Defendant Consolidated
Marking Group, Inc. D/B/A Charlotte Insurance’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is
DENIED AS MOOT. (Doc. No. 25)
SO ORDERED.
Signed: March 7, 2016