REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

LYNNE A. SITARSKI, Magistrate Judge.

Pending before this Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Motion. (ECF No. 3). The instant matter was referred to me by the Honorable C. Darnell Jones, II to prepare a Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 9). For the following reasons, I respectfully recommend that the motion be DENIED as MOOT on the grounds that Plaintiff has withdrawn the motion without prejudice. (ECF No. 38).

I. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff, Radio Music License Committee, Inc. originated the underlying action against Defendant Global Music Rights, with the filing of a Complaint on November 18, 2016. (ECF. No. 1). The same day, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (ECF. No. 3). Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction sought to "maintain the status quo and prevent defendant Global Music Rights, LLC ("GMR") from imposing unilateral and monopolistic licensing terms on RMLC's members." (See ECF. No. 3, p.2).

On November 23, 2016, Judge Jones referred Plaintiff's Motion for injunctive relief to this Court for a Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 9). This Court scheduled and held four on the record telephone conferences with the parties regarding Plaintiff's Motion. (ECF Nos. 23, 29, 31, 33). During the calls, the parties reported that they were involved in discussions that could potentially obviate the need for injunctive relief (at least for the time being). The discussions apparently were successful, and on January 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a "Notice of Withdrawal of Its Preliminary Injunction Motion Without Prejudice." (ECF No. 38).

II. CONCLUSION

For the forgoing reasons, I make the following:

RECOMMENDATION

AND NOW this 5th day of January, 2017, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction be DENIED as MOOT on the grounds that it has been withdrawn without prejudice.

ORDER

AND NOW, this ___ day of ___, 2017, after review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Lynne A. Sitarski dated January 5, 2017, and any objections filed thereto, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED.

2. Plaintiff's "Motion for Preliminary Injunction" (Doc. No. 3) is DENIED as moot.

NOTICE

Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the Report and Recommendation filed by United States Magistrate Judge Sitarski, on this date in the above captioned matter. You are hereby notified that within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this Notice of the filing of the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, any party may file (in duplicate) with the clerk and serve upon all other parties written objections thereto (See Local Civil Rule 72.1 IV (b)). Failure of a party to file timely objections to the Report & Recommendation shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions of the Magistrate Judge that are accepted by the District Court Judge.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B), the judge to whom the case is assigned will make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. The judge may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge, receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.

Where the magistrate judge has been appointed as special master under F.R.Civ.P 53, the procedure under that rule shall be followed.