ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Docket 49, 58

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.

On September 6, 2013, the Court entered default judgment against Defendant Fairline Development Canada (1992) Ltd. ("Fairline"), and ordered Plaintiff to file a motion to prove damages. Dkt. 47. On November 27, 2013, Plaintiff filed a statement of damages to prove up default judgment against Fairline. Dkt. 49. On December 16, 2013, this matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte ("the Magistrate") for a Report and Recommendation. Dkt. 51. On March 7, 2014, the Magistrate issued a Report and Recommendation in which she recommends awarding damages in the amount of $1,830,228. Dkt. 58.

Any objection to the report and recommendation of a Magistrate Judge must be filed within fourteen days of receipt thereof. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district court must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made," and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

The deadline to object to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation was March 21, 2014. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)(1), (d); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). To date, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. In the absence of a timely objection, the Court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ("The statute [28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)] makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if [an] objection is made, but not otherwise.") (en banc). The Court has reviewed the record on its face and finds no clear error. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 58) is ACCEPTED and shall become the Order of this Court. This Order terminates Docket 49 and Docket 58.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiff shall file a memorandum, not to exceed five (5) pages, by no later than seven (7) days from the date this Order is filed showing cause why Defendant Tawa Supermarkets, Inc. should not be dismissed from this action under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to timely effect service within 120 days after the complaint was filed. Alternatively, Plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal as to Defendant Tawa Supermarkets, Inc. under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff is warned that the failure to timely comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of Tawa Supermarkets, Inc. from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.