Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ross Hunter v. Oasis Financial Solutions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


March 21, 2011

ROSS HUNTER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
OASIS FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, LLC,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. William V. Gallo United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and GRANTING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT [doc. #12]

Plaintiff filed the above-captioned case on April 6, 2010. Defendant Oasis Financial Solutions, LLC was served with the summon and complaint on August 10, 2010, but did not file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. On September 16, 2010, the Clerk of the Court entered default as to Oasis. Plaintiff then moved for default judgment seeking $75,000 in damages. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment was referred the assigned magistrate judge, William V. Gallo, for a Report and Recommendation which was to include whether default judgment should be granted and if granted, the amount of damages to which plaintiff is entitled.

On December 21, 2010, the Report was filed with the magistrate judge recommending that default judgment be granted in the amount of $73,000.00 for actual damages and $2,000.00 for statutory damages. Although plaintiff requested attorneys' fees and costs in his complaint, he did not seek attorneys' fees in his motion for default judgment. The magistrate judge however recommended such an award in an amount subject to proof. (Report at 8.)

In reviewing a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the district court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made," and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Under this statute, "the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1225-26 & n.5 (D. Ariz. 2003) (applying Reyna-Tapia to habeas review).

The Court notes that no objections have been made to the Report and therefore, the Court may adopt the findings of the magistrate judge without de novo review.

Having reviewed the Report, the Court finds good cause to adopt the recommendations in their entirety.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for default judgment is GRANTED in the amount of $75,000.00 plus attorney's fees in an amount to be determined. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if attorney's fees are sought, plaintiff shall file a motion for attorney's fees on or before April 4, 2011. Counsel is advised that compliance with the Civil Local Rules regarding the scheduling of motions is required.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

M. James LorenzUnited States District Court Judge

20110321

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.