PIPER
v.
METRO SOLUTIONS, LLC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting plaintiffs' motion for an order to show cause.
Plaintiffs filed a motion for an order to show cause why the defendant should not be held in contempt for failing to comply with a prior order compell…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Order To Show Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the report and recommendation of Julie S. Sneed, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on June 14, 2022. (Doc. 131). Judge Sneed recommends that Plaintiffs’ construed motion for an order to show cause against Defendant (Doc. 108) be granted, and that the Court direct Defendant to show cause why it should be held in contempt for failure to comply with the Court’s February 23, 2022, order compelling discovery (Doc. 105). No objections to the report and recommendation were filed, and the time to object has expired. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 718 F. 2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no objection is filed, a court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F. 2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982). Upon due consideration of the record, including Judge Sneed’s report and recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation. The Court
agrees with Judge Sneed’s well-reasoned factual findings and legal conclusions. Consequently, Plaintiffs’ motion for an order to show cause is granted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) Judge Sneed’s report and recommendation (Doc. 131) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review.
(2) Plaintiffs’ construed motion for order to show cause against Defendant (Doc. 108) is hereby GRANTED. (3) Defendant Metro Solutions, LLC, is directed to show cause by a written response, filed on or before July 15, 2022, as to why it should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with the Court’s February 23, 2022, order (Doc. 105).
(4) Plaintiffs are directed to serve a copy of their construed motion (Doc. 108), the report and recommendation (Doc. 131), and this Order on Defendant in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5, and promptly thereafter file with the Court a certificate of service or a notice of compliance stating the date and manner of service. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 30th day of June, 2022.
Y tid de ) A. j--! f
TOM BARBER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ennis Nettles v. Louie L. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th Cir. 1983)