Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SOLIS v. CSG WORKFORCE PARTNERS LLC, 2:11-CV-903-TC. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Utah Number: infdco20120202d99 Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 01, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 01, 2012
Summary: ORDER TENA CAMPBELL, District Judge. This administrative subpoena enforcement action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge David Nuffer under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), to review (1) Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis's Petition to Enforce Administrative Subpoena pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 209, 1 including whether Respondents have shown cause for failure to comply with the Subpoena; 2 and (2) Respondents' Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Stay. 3 Judge Nuffer issued a Report & Rec
More

ORDER

TENA CAMPBELL, District Judge.

This administrative subpoena enforcement action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge David Nuffer under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), to review (1) Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis's Petition to Enforce Administrative Subpoena pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 209,1 including whether Respondents have shown cause for failure to comply with the Subpoena;2 and (2) Respondents' Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Stay.3 Judge Nuffer issued a Report & Recommendation (R&R) for each of the two subjects.4 Respondents objected to both R&Rs.5 Petitioner filed a response in support of Judge Nuffer's recommendations.6

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this court reviews de novo the proposed findings, legal conclusions, and recommendations to which Respondents have objected. The court has reviewed all relevant pleadings and case law, and finds that Judge Nuffer's factual findings and legal conclusions are correct. Accordingly, the court hereby ADOPTS Judge Nuffer's November 2, 2011 Report & Recommendation7 and Judge Nuffer's December 20, 2011 Report & Recommendation8 as the ORDER OF THIS COURT.

To reiterate:

1. Respondents have failed to show cause why they should not be compelled to comply with Petitioner's subpoena.

2. Respondents are ORDERED to provide the information required by the Petitioner no later than 30 days from the date of this Order.

3. The running of the applicable statute of limitations is tolled from September 16, 2011 (the date the documents were due to be produced pursuant to the Subpoena), until such time as Petitioner notifies the District Court that Respondents have complied with the District Court's order enforcing the subpoena.

4. Respondents' Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative to Stay (Docket No. 11) is DENIED.

5. The Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to close the above-captioned matter.

FootNotes


1. Docket No. 2.
2. See Sept. 28, 2011 Order to Show Cause (Docket No. 6).
3. Docket No. 11.
4. Docket Nos. 19 and 24.
5. See Docket Nos. 22 and 25.
6. See Docket No. 26.
7. Docket No. 19.
8. Docket No. 24.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer