CrossFIT INCORPORATED v. MARTIN, CV-14-02277-PHX-JJT. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20170516721
Visitors: 8
Filed: May 15, 2017
Latest Update: May 15, 2017
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION ORDER JOHN J. TUCHI , District Judge . At issue is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") entered by United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan in this matter March 23, 2017, recommending that "Defendants'/Counterclaimants' damages allegations be limited at trial to those amounts they represented up to and including December 22, 2016." (Doc. 193 at 2.) The parties had fourteen days after the R&R issued to file any objection to it. The time for such objections has run
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION ORDER JOHN J. TUCHI , District Judge . At issue is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") entered by United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan in this matter March 23, 2017, recommending that "Defendants'/Counterclaimants' damages allegations be limited at trial to those amounts they represented up to and including December 22, 2016." (Doc. 193 at 2.) The parties had fourteen days after the R&R issued to file any objection to it. The time for such objections has run ..
More
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
ORDER
JOHN J. TUCHI, District Judge.
At issue is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") entered by United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan in this matter March 23, 2017, recommending that "Defendants'/Counterclaimants' damages allegations be limited at trial to those amounts they represented up to and including December 22, 2016." (Doc. 193 at 2.) The parties had fourteen days after the R&R issued to file any objection to it. The time for such objections has run and no party filed an objection. The Court is thus empowered to accept the R&R without further review, see United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003), and to consider waived any party's right to appellate review of the findings of fact in this Order. See Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court nonetheless reviewed the R&R on its merits. Upon that review, the Court concludes the underlying reasoning of Judge Duncan both sound and persuasive, and thus shall adopt the R&R in whole.
IT IS ORDERED adopting the R&R (Doc. 193) in whole.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED limiting Defendants'/Counterclaimants' damages allegations at trial to those amounts they represented up to and including December 22, 2016.
Source: Leagle
