Matthews v. Priority Energy Services, LLC

Filing 95

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 87 Report and Recommendations on Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings. ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED; the Signatory Plaintiffs are DISMISSED from the litigation and compelled to arbitration. It isfurther ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Stay the litigation is DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 1/3/17. (mjc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
STEVEN MATTHEWS, individually and §
on behalf of others similarly situated,
§
§
v.
§
§
PRIORITY ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, §
et al.

Civil Action No. 6:15-cv-448-RWS-KNM

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES
MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings,
conclusions, and recommendation on Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay
Proceedings

(“Motion”)

has

been

presented

for

consideration.

The

Report

and

Recommendation (ECF 87) filed on December 2, 2016 recommends that the Motion be
granted-in-part and denied-in-part. Neither party filed written objections.
This Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s finding that the claims brought by the
Signatory Plaintiffs are subject to arbitration. Further, this Court also agrees that, because the
entirety of the claims brought by the Signatory Plaintiffs are referable to arbitration, retaining
jurisdiction over the Signatory Plaintiffs serves no purpose, and the Signatory Plaintiffs should
be dismissed from this action. With respect to Defendants’ motion to stay, this Court agrees
with the Magistrate Judge that the Court should not issue a mandatory stay, and a
discretionary stay would be inappropriate because it would not be an efficient way to control
or manage the docket.
Accordingly, finding no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning, the findings
and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are adopted as those of the Court. It is

.

US 7,430,471 B2
Page 2
|U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS

Discrete Wireless, GPS FleetManagement, RealTimeVehicle Track

ORDERED that - the Defendant’s Motion to Compel ..., downloaded from theGRANTED;
ing, Fleet Tracking System Arbitration is Interneton Sep.

2006/0061476 A1 *

3/2006 Patil et al. ................ 340/.572.4

21, 2005 at http://www.discretewireless.com/index.asp.

DieselBoss, Fleet
Tracking and Truck arbitration. It
the SignatoryOTHER PUBLICATIONS
Plaintiffs are DISMISSED from the litigation GPS Internet on Sep. 21, Management System, is
downloaded from and compelled to 2005 at http://www.
the

Advanced Tracking Technologies, Inc., GPS Vehicle Tracking Systems, GPSTracking, downloaded from the Internet on Sep. 21, 2005

further
at http://www.advantrack.com.

dieselboss.com/track/track.htm.

* cited by examiner

ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Stay the litigation is DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 3rd day of January, 2017.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2