Filed: May 03, 2017
Latest Update: May 03, 2017
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DANIEL E. KNOWLES, III , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is the Motion in Response to Subpoena Pursuant to L.S.A.-R.S. 46:56(H) [Doc. #211], which was referred to this Court on April 20, 2017. [Doc. #239]. The Department of Children and Family Services filed the motion on April 12, 2017, which means that its submission date was today, May 3, 2017, under this Court's local rules. This Court has received no opposition to the motion in accordance with the local ru
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DANIEL E. KNOWLES, III , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is the Motion in Response to Subpoena Pursuant to L.S.A.-R.S. 46:56(H) [Doc. #211], which was referred to this Court on April 20, 2017. [Doc. #239]. The Department of Children and Family Services filed the motion on April 12, 2017, which means that its submission date was today, May 3, 2017, under this Court's local rules. This Court has received no opposition to the motion in accordance with the local rul..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
DANIEL E. KNOWLES, III, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is the Motion in Response to Subpoena Pursuant to L.S.A.-R.S. 46:56(H) [Doc. #211], which was referred to this Court on April 20, 2017. [Doc. #239]. The Department of Children and Family Services filed the motion on April 12, 2017, which means that its submission date was today, May 3, 2017, under this Court's local rules. This Court has received no opposition to the motion in accordance with the local rules of this Court. Finding that the motion has merit,
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion in response to Subpoena Pursuant to L.S.A.-R.S. 46:56(H) [Doc. #211] be GRANTED AS UNOPPOSED.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT
Objections must be: (1) specific, (2) in writing, and (3) served within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1(a), 6(b) and 72(b). A party's failure to object bars that party from: (1) entitlement to de novo review by a district judge; and (2) appellate review of the un-objected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court, except upon grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
