VFS LEASING CO. v. USASIA CASINO TOURS/ENTERTAINMENT, INC., 14-cv-02941-SC. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20150107631
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 06, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 06, 2015
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge. The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero's report and recommendation (the "Report", ECF No. 18) regarding Plaintiff VFS Leasing Co.'s ("VFS") motion for default judgment. The report was issued on October 31, 2014, and objections were due by November 14. No objections have been filed. The Court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned, and thorough. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the magistrate jud
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge. The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero's report and recommendation (the "Report", ECF No. 18) regarding Plaintiff VFS Leasing Co.'s ("VFS") motion for default judgment. The report was issued on October 31, 2014, and objections were due by November 14. No objections have been filed. The Court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned, and thorough. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the magistrate judg..
More
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge.
The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero's report and recommendation (the "Report", ECF No. 18) regarding Plaintiff VFS Leasing Co.'s ("VFS") motion for default judgment. The report was issued on October 31, 2014, and objections were due by November 14. No objections have been filed.
The Court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned, and thorough. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the magistrate judge's report.1 VFS' motion for default judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as described in Judge Spero's Report. The Court will issue a judgment concurrently with this Order, consistent with Judge Spero's recommendations.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. For completeness, the Court notes that there is a transcription error in the Report. The final total damages sum on page 11 of the Report is not the sum of the damage amounts calculated elsewhere in the report. The judgment will reflect this; $494,942.49 is the correct amount of damages owed as of October 31, 2014.
Source: Leagle
