David v. Anshu Pathak

Full title: HARRY AND DAVID, an Oregon Corporation Plaintiff, v. ANSHU PATHAK, an…

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jun 11, 2010

Civ. No. 09-3013-CL (D. Or. Jun. 11, 2010)

Opinion

Civ. No. 09-3013-CL.

June 11, 2010

ORDER

OWEN PANNER, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews the legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1983).

I have given this matter de novo review. I find no error in the Report and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#37) is adopted. Plaintiff's request for sanctions (#36) is GRANTED. The court imposes the following sanctions:

(1) Defendant's answer is stricken.

(2) Defendant's untimely and evasive responses to plaintiff's requests for admissions are stricken. Admissions are deemed admitted.

(3) Default judgment is entered against defendant.

(4) Defendant is ordered to pay reasonable attorney's fees caused by defendant's non-compliance.

Magistrate Judge Clarke shall conduct a hearing regarding plaintiff's damages in this action. Defendant may contest the amount of damages, but may not contest liability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.