OLIVEIRA v. MARTINS, 14-0482. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20150727726
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jul. 08, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 08, 2015
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KAREN WELLS ROBY , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff, Cleber Oliviera's Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 47), which was referred to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge to issue a report and recommendation. On July 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Withdraw Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 50), notifying the Court that the underlying motion is now moot because the Defendants electronically tran
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KAREN WELLS ROBY , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff, Cleber Oliviera's Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 47), which was referred to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge to issue a report and recommendation. On July 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Withdraw Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 50), notifying the Court that the underlying motion is now moot because the Defendants electronically trans..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KAREN WELLS ROBY, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff, Cleber Oliviera's Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 47), which was referred to the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge to issue a report and recommendation. On July 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Withdraw Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 50), notifying the Court that the underlying motion is now moot because the Defendants electronically transmitted the signed settlement documents.
Accordingly,
IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 50) be GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Second Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (R. Doc. 34) be DENIED AS MOOT.
A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court, provided that the party has been served with notice that such consequences will result from a failure to object. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996).1
FootNotes
1. Douglass referenced the previously applicable ten-day period for the filing of objections. Effective December 1, 2009, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) was amended to extend the period to fourteen days.
Source: Leagle
