Noland v. Organo Gold International, Inc., 2:18-cv-1275-JAD-CWH. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20181113c43
Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 19, 2018
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court is plaintiff James D. Noland Jr.'s motion for an order of misjoinder (ECF No. 60), filed on October 10, 2018. Defendant Organo Gold International, Inc., filed a notice of non-opposition (ECF No. 65) to plaintiff's motion on October 11, 2018. Given that defendants do not oppose this motion, the court will therefore recommend that plaintiff's motion for an order of misjoinder be granted. IT IS THEREFO
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court is plaintiff James D. Noland Jr.'s motion for an order of misjoinder (ECF No. 60), filed on October 10, 2018. Defendant Organo Gold International, Inc., filed a notice of non-opposition (ECF No. 65) to plaintiff's motion on October 11, 2018. Given that defendants do not oppose this motion, the court will therefore recommend that plaintiff's motion for an order of misjoinder be granted. IT IS THEREFOR..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
C.W. HOFFMAN, JR., Magistrate Judge.
Presently before the court is plaintiff James D. Noland Jr.'s motion for an order of misjoinder (ECF No. 60), filed on October 10, 2018. Defendant Organo Gold International, Inc., filed a notice of non-opposition (ECF No. 65) to plaintiff's motion on October 11, 2018. Given that defendants do not oppose this motion, the court will therefore recommend that plaintiff's motion for an order of misjoinder be granted.
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that plaintiff James D. Noland Jr.'s motion for an order of misjoinder (ECF No. 60) be GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that defendant Organo Gold International, Inc., be DISMISSED from this case without prejudice.
NOTICE
This report and recommendation is submitted to the United States district judge assigned to this case under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party who objects to this report and recommendation may file a written objection supported by points and authorities within fourteen days of being served with this report and recommendation. Local Rule IB 3-2(a). Failure to file a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).
Source: Leagle
