Square Ring Inc. v. Troyanovsky, 3:16-cv-641-MCR-GRJ. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20180424961
Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2018
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS , Chief District Judge . On April 4, 2018, the magistrate judge requested the Court to enter an appropriate case management and scheduling order consistent with the deadlines in his Report and Recommendation. See ECF No. 34. Defendant Eduard Troyanovsky subsequently submitted a Letter to Magistrate Judge Jones, asking him to extend various deadlines in his initial Report and Recommendation (the "Letter Motion"). Troyanovsky explained that Square Ring did not oppose
Summary: ORDER M. CASEY RODGERS , Chief District Judge . On April 4, 2018, the magistrate judge requested the Court to enter an appropriate case management and scheduling order consistent with the deadlines in his Report and Recommendation. See ECF No. 34. Defendant Eduard Troyanovsky subsequently submitted a Letter to Magistrate Judge Jones, asking him to extend various deadlines in his initial Report and Recommendation (the "Letter Motion"). Troyanovsky explained that Square Ring did not oppose ..
More
ORDER
M. CASEY RODGERS, Chief District Judge.
On April 4, 2018, the magistrate judge requested the Court to enter an appropriate case management and scheduling order consistent with the deadlines in his Report and Recommendation. See ECF No. 34. Defendant Eduard Troyanovsky subsequently submitted a Letter to Magistrate Judge Jones, asking him to extend various deadlines in his initial Report and Recommendation (the "Letter Motion"). Troyanovsky explained that Square Ring did not oppose the extension. On April 6, 2018, the magistrate judge recommended granting Troyanovsky's Letter Motion in an Amended Report and Recommendation, see ECF No. 34, which he asked the Court to adopt in place of his initial Report and Recommendation. No objections were filed.
Having fully considered the Amended Report and Recommendation on the unopposed Letter Motion, the Court has determined that the Amended Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. The magistrate judge's Amended Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 34, is ADOPTED by the Court;
2. The magistrate judge's initial Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 32, is VACATED; and
3. Defendant Troyanovsky's Motion to Extend, ECF No. 33, is GRANTED.
DONE AND ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
