Nussbaum et al v. Technical International Supply Corp. et al

Filing 73

Order Adopting 72 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Burke. The parties' stipulated partial dismissal with prejudice will be approved and the Court will retain jurisdiction over the third-party complaint in this case. Signed by Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. on 9/26/2012. (M,De)

DOWD, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Tiffani Nussbaum, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Technical International Supply Corp., et al,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 5:11 CV 2322
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND
ORDER

The Court referred this case to Magistrate Judge Burke for general pretrial supervision.
Pursuant to a settlement, plaintiffs and defendants Millenium Colorworks, Inc., Technical
International Supply Corp. dba Technical Tattoo Supply & Manufacturing Co., Inc., and
Superior Tattoo Equipment, Inc., filed a stipulation of partial dismissal with prejudice. ECF 71.
Defendants Millenium Colorworks, Inc. and Technical International Supply Corp. dba Technical
Tattoo Supply & Manufacturing Co., Inc., have filed a third-party complaint against third-party
defendant RGD Enterprises, Inc. The stipulated partial dismissal provides that such dismissal
does not affect any defendant’s rights to pursue their third-party claims.
Magistrate Judge Kathleen Burke issued a Report and Recommendation recommending
that the Court approve the stipulation of partial dismissal with prejudice. Magistrate Judge
Burke further recommends that the Court exercise its discretion to retain supplemental
jurisdiction over the third-party complaint to allow for an efficient resolution of the remaining
claims that involve the same core facts as the original action. ECF 72.

(5:11 CV 2322)
Under the relevant statute:
[T] magistrate judge shall file [her] proposed findings and
recommendations under subparagraph (B) with the court and a
copy shall forthwith be mailed to all parties.
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party
may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings
and recommendations as provided by rules of court. A judge of
the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of
the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to
which objection is made.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
No objections have been filed to Magistrate Judge Burke’s Report and Recommendation.
The failure to file written objections to a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation
constitutes a waiver of a de novo determination by the district court of an issue covered in the
report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see United
States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and adopts
the same. Accordingly, the parties’ stipulated partial dismissal with prejudice will be approved
and the Court will retain jurisdiction over the third-party complaint in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
September 26, 2012
Date

s/ David D. Dowd, Jr.
David D. Dowd, Jr.
U.S. District Judge

2