From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Xiaolong

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Apr 13, 2017
Case No. 2:15-cv-02340-GMN-VCF (D. Nev. Apr. 13, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 2:15-cv-02340-GMN-VCF

04-13-2017

LAS VEGAS SANDS CORP., a Nevada corporation, Plaintiff, v. XIAOLONG LI et al., Defendants.


AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach (ECF No. 27), which states that Plaintiff Las Vegas Sands Corporation's ("Plaintiff's") Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 26) should be granted.

The R&R further recommends that Plaintiff be awarded damages in the amount of $150,000.00, and that pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)(1)(C), GoDaddy and 22net be required to transfer the registrations for the following identified domain names to a domain name registrar of Las Vegas Sands' choice: 0077.net, ca0011.com, ca0022.com, ca0033.com, ca0044.com, ca0055.com, ca1066.com, ca0077.com, ca0088.com, ca0099.com, 036.net, 4047.com, 09399.com, j111888.com, j222888.com, j333888.com, j666888.com, 4337.com, 20288.com, js567.com, js8666.com, js686.com, js3333.com, js722.com, 3863.com, 3863jsc.com, jsc0000.com, jsc00000.com, jsc1111.com, jsc11111.com, jsc2222.com, jsc22222.com, jsc3333.com, jsc4444.com, jsc44444.com, jsc5555.com, jsc55555.com, jsc6666.com, jsc88888.com, jsc9999.com, jsc99999.com, 111111.com, lz0000.com, lz0009.com, lz11888.com, 2088666.com, 2099666.com, 8566999.com, 8577999.com, 8766999.com, 9500888.com, 929266.com, 31567.com, 333js.com, 667400.com, 779907.com, and j4888.com ("Identified Domain Names"). The R&R also recommends that pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)(1)(C), if GoDaddy or 22net fail to transfer the registrations of the Identified Domain Names to a domain name registrar of Las Vegas Sands' choice within ten (10) business days of Las Vegas Sands' request, then VeriSign, Inc., the ".com" domain name registry, shall, within ten (10) business days of Las Vegas Sands' request, change the registrar of record for any of tthe above listed domain names identified by Las Vegas Sands to a registrar of record of Las Vegas Sands' choice. Lastly, the R&R recommends that final judgment be entered against Defendants.

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court 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); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 27) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in FULL.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that GoDaddy and 22net shall transfer the registrations for the Identified Domain Names to a domain name registrar of Las Vegas Sands' choice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if GoDaddy and 22net fail to transfer the registrations of the Identified Domain Names to a domain name registrar of Las Vegas Sands' choice within ten (10) business days of Las Vegas Sands' request, then VeriSign, Inc. shall, within ten (10) business days of Las Vegas Sands' request, change the registrar of record for the above listed domain names to a registrar of record of Las Vegas Sands' choice.

The Clerk of Court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

DATED this 13 day of April, 2017.

/s/_________

Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Xiaolong

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Apr 13, 2017
Case No. 2:15-cv-02340-GMN-VCF (D. Nev. Apr. 13, 2017)
Case details for

Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Xiaolong

Case Details

Full title:LAS VEGAS SANDS CORP., a Nevada corporation, Plaintiff, v. XIAOLONG LI et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Apr 13, 2017

Citations

Case No. 2:15-cv-02340-GMN-VCF (D. Nev. Apr. 13, 2017)