USA v. Schindler, et al

Filing 29

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION to Grant 25 MOTION on Judgment for Answer (Objections to R&R due by 11/18/2005) signed by Judge Cynthia Imbrogno. (LS, Courtroom Deputy)

Download PDF
USA v. Schindler, et al Doc. 29 Case 2:00-cv-00317-CI Document 29 Filed 11/02/2005 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and JENSEN DISTRIBUTION SERVICES, Garnishee. v. MICHAEL B. SCHINDLER, Defendant, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-00-317-CI REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON ANSWER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON BEFORE THE COURT on Report and Recommendation is Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on Answer and Order to Pay. (Ct. Rec. 25.) Assistant United States Attorney Rolf Tangvald represents Plaintiff; there has been no appearance by Defendant. On September 19, 2005, the court denied with leave to renew the instant Motion pending additional documentation of service of the applicable pleadings on the debtor. (Ct. Rec. 26.) Plaintiff has since filed additional documentation demonstrating abode service by certified mail of the appropriate pleadings on Defendant. (Ct. Rec. 27.) Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion (Ct. Rec. 25) be granted, the Garnishee be directed to pay 25% of Defendant's nonexempt disposable earnings to Plaintiff, and the garnishment payments continue until the debt to Plaintiff is paid in full or REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON ANSWER - 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:00-cv-00317-CI Document 29 Filed 11/02/2005 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 until the Garnishee no longer has custody, possession or control of any property belonging to the debtor or until further order of this court. The check shall be made payable to the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and mailed to: United States Attorney's Office, P.O. Box 1494, Spokane, WA 99210-1494. OBJECTIONS Any party may object to a magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report within ten (10) days following service with a copy thereof. the Clerk of the Such party shall file written objections with Court and serve objections on all parties, specifically identifying any the portions to which objection is being made, and the basis therefor. Any response to the objection shall be filed within ten (10) days after receipt of the objection. Attention is directed to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e), which adds another three (3) days from the date of mailing if service is by mail. A district judge will make a de novo determination of those portions to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's determination. The judge need not conduct a new hearing or hear arguments and may consider the magistrate judge's record and make an independent determination thereon. The judge may, but is not required to, accept or consider additional evidence, or may recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621 (9th Cir. 2000); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73; LMR 4, Local Rules for the Eastern District of Washington. A magistrate judge's recommendation cannot be appealed to a court of appeals; only the district judge's order or judgment can be appealed. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON ANSWER - 2 Case 2:00-cv-00317-CI Document 29 Filed 11/02/2005 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The District Court Executive is directed to file this Report and Recommendation and provide copies to Plaintiff, Defendant, and Garnishee and the referring district judge. DATED November 2, 2005. S/ CYNTHIA IMBROGNO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON ANSWER - 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?