Hunter Fan Company v. Minka Lighting, Inc.

Filing 119

ORDER denying as moot 118 Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Signed by Chief Judge Jon Phipps McCalla on 7/27/10. (McCalla, Jon)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION ________________________________________________________________ HUNTER FAN COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil No. 06-2108-JPM-tmp ) MINKA LIGHTING, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) ________________________________________________________________ ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ________________________________________________________________ Before the Court is Defendant Minka Lighting, Inc.'s Motion for Leave to File Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry 118), filed July 26, 2010. the following reasons, Defendant's motion is DENIED AS MOOT. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), a party has fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation to file written objections. This fourteen-day For

time period, however, is computed in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a) ("The

following rules apply in computing any time period specified in these rules, in any local rule or court order, or in any statute that does not specify a method of computing time.").

1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d) provides that "[w]hen a party may or must act within a specified time after service and service is made under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), 3 days are added after the period would otherwise expire under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 6(a)." Service of the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation was made upon the parties through the Court's Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") system; therefore, the parties were served pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2)(E). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(E) ("A paper is served

under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6] by . . . sending it by electronic means . . . ."). Thus, Rule 6(d) effectively

extended the time period for Defendant to file objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation from fourteen (14) days to seventeen (17) days. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation was entered on July 7, 2010. Seventeen days from July 7, 2010,

computed pursuant to Rule 6(a)(1), is Saturday July 24, 2010. Thus, in light of Rule 6(a)(1)(C), the last day for Defendant to file objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation was the following Monday July 26, 2010. Defendant filed its Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on July 22, 2010. Defendant's Objections

were therefore timely filed, and Defendant's Motion for Leave to 2

File Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 27th day of July, 2010. /s/ JON PHIPPS McCALLA CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3