Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-5927 - Radisson Hotels International, Inc. v. Radisson Cars & Limo, Inc. et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-5927 - Radisson Hotels International, Inc. v. Radisson Cars & Limo, Inc. et al
March 17, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - On February 25, 2016, Judge Brown issued a report recommending that the Plaintiffs motion for a default judgment be denied without prejudice to renew following the provision of a memorandum of law and appropriate evidentiary support consistent with the applicable rules (the R&R). It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections. As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the February 19, 2016 R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error). Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. SEE ATTACHED ORDER for further details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/17/2016. (Coleman, Laurie)
March 21, 2017
PDF | More
ADOPTION ORDER - On March 1, 2017, Judge Brown issued a 22 report (the R&R) recommending that the Plaintiffs 19 motion for default judgment be granted; that a permanent injunction be issued against the Defendants; and that the Court endorse the Plaintiffs proposed order after striking paragraphs 12 and 13. The Plaintiff provided proof of service of the R&R on March 3, 2017. It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections. As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error). Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for the Plaintiff in accordance with the R&R, and to close this case. SEE ATTACHED ORDER for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/21/2017. (Coleman, Laurie)