Breaking Glass Pictures v. Does 1-283

Filing 43

ORDER that the R&R is ACCEPTED IN WHOLE. Defendant DeArmonds motion to dismiss 27 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part: 1. The motion to sever all Defendants is GRANTED. 2. The motion to dismiss Defendant DeArmond for lack of per sonal jurisdiction is DENIED without prejudice. 3. All claims, other than the claim of Plaintiff against Doe Defendant 1 are DISMISSED, without prejudice, to allow refilling of claims against Doe Defendants 2-283 in individual cases. 4. Any refilled cases against Doe Defendants 2-100 shall be filed in the appropriate division of the Eastern District of Tennessee.5. The motion to quash 26 is GRANTED. 6. The motion for protective order 25 is DENIED as moot. 7. Plaintiff shall serve Doe Defendant 1 within thirty (30) days of entry of this Memorandum and Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 11/4/13. (c/m) (ABF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
BREAKING GLASS PICTURES,
Plaintiff,
v.
Does 1-283,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.: 3:13-CV-75-TAV-BHG

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On September 30, 2013, the Honorable H. Bruce Guyton, United States Magistrate
Judge, filed an 11-page Report and Recommendation (R&R) [Doc. 41] in which he
recommended that that Plaintiff’s claims against Doe Defendants 2-283 be dismissed,
without prejudice, for improper joinder; Defendant DeArmond’s motion to quash be
granted; Defendant DeArmond’s motion for protective order be denied as moot; and that
Plaintiff be given thirty days to serve Doe 1.
There being no timely objections by Plaintiff, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and the
Court being in complete agreement with the Magistrate Judge, the R&R is hereby
ACCEPTED IN WHOLE. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant
DeArmond’s motion to dismiss [Doc. 27] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part:
1. The motion to sever all Defendants is GRANTED.
2. The motion to dismiss Defendant DeArmond for lack of personal jurisdiction
is DENIED without prejudice.

3. All claims, other than the claim of Plaintiff against Doe Defendant 1 are
DISMISSED, without prejudice, to allow refilling of claims against Doe
Defendants 2-283 in individual cases.
4. Any refilled cases against Doe Defendants 2-100 shall be filed in the
appropriate division of the Eastern District of Tennessee.
5. The motion to quash [Doc. 26] is GRANTED.
6. The motion for protective order [Doc. 25] is DENIED as moot.
7. Plaintiff shall serve Doe Defendant 1 within thirty (30) days of entry of this
Memorandum and Order.
ENTER:

s/ Thomas A. Varlan
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2