Highpoint Risk Services LLC v. Companion Property & Casualty Insurance Co

Filing 32

ORDER: After careful consideration of the pleadings, file, record in this case, Report, and Defendant's objections to the Report, the court accepts the 25 magistrate judge's findings and conclusions. Accordingly, the court denies without prejudice Defendant's 8 Motion to Transfer Venue, and denies as moot Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. Defendant may refile its motion to transfer within 28 days of Plaintiff's filing in accordance with the 9/11/2015 order. The court gr ants in part and denies in part the parties' 30 Motion to Extend Time. Defendant's request to file its original answer on 10/9/2015 is granted. Because the court denies the motion to transfer without prejudice, Plaintiff's request to file its response to the objections on 10/15/2015, is denied as moot. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 9/24/2015) (bdb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
HIGHPOINT RISK SERVICES, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMPANION PROPERTY &
CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY.,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 3:14-CV-3398-L

ORDER
Before the court is Defendant Companion Property & Casualty Insurance Company’s
(“Defendant”) Motion to Transfer Venue and Brief in Support (Doc. 8), filed October 16, 2014,
Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike New Evidence and Arguments Offered in Defendant’s Reply and
Supplemental Appendix in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Transfer Venue and Brief in Support
(Doc. 23), filed August 14, 2015, and the parties’ Agreed Motion to Extend Time (Doc. 30) filed
September 18, 2015. The motion to transfer venue and motion to strike were referred to Magistrate
Judge Irma Ramirez on January 1, 2015. The magistrate judge entered Findings, Conclusions, and
Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) on August 24, 2015,
recommending that Defendant’s Motion to Transfer be denied, and Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike be
denied as moot. Defendant filed objections to the Report on September 8, 2015.
On September 11, 2015, this court ordered Plaintiff to add Aspen to the action as a party
plaintiff. Accordingly, Defendant should be afforded the opportunity to refile its Motion to Transfer
after Aspen is added to the action.

Order - Page 1

After careful consideration of the pleadings, file, record in this case, Report, and Defendant’s
objections to the Report, the court accepts the magistrate judge’s findings and conclusions.
Accordingly, the court denies without prejudice Defendant’s Motion to Transfer Venue, and denies
as moot Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike. Defendant may refile its motion to transfer within 28 days of
Plaintiff’s filing in accordance with the September 11, 2015 order. The court grants in part and
denies in part the parties’ Motion to Extend Time. Defendant’s request to file its original answer
on October 9, 2015 is granted. Because the court denies the motion to transfer without prejudice,
Plaintiff’s request to file its response to the objections on October 15, 2015, is denied as moot.
It is so ordered this 24th day of September, 2015.

_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge

Order - Page 2