Summary
finding that the plaintiffs' "explanations for their failure to earlier dismiss [the nondiverse defendant] from the action [were] inconsistent and implausible"
Summary of this case from Ramirez v. JohnsonOpinion
13-CV-808-A
11-20-2013
PAUL K. FORTH, JR., and MARY KAY FORTH, Plaintiffs, v. DIVERSEY CORPORATION, JOHNSON DIVERSEY, INC., and CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS, INC., Defendants.
ORDER
This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On October 23, 2013, Magistrate Judge McCarthy filed a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 19), recommending that a motion by plaintiffs to remand the action to Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Erie, be denied.
The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record in this case, and the pleadings and materials submitted by the parties, and no objections having been timely filed, it is hereby
ORDERED, that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge McCarthy's Report and Recommendation, plaintiffs' motion to remand the action to Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Erie, is denied.
The case is recommitted to Magistrate Judge McCarthy for further proceedings pursuant to the Court's prior order. (Dkt. No. 6).
SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: November 20, 2013