Opinion
Case No.: 2:09-cv-00466-GMN-CWH
06-09-2016
ROBERT G. GREENE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JACOB TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, LLC, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 207) filed by Defendants Carol Jimmerson, James Jimmerson, and Jacob Transportation Services, LLC (collectively "Defendants"). Plaintiffs Robert G. Greene, Thomas Schemkes, and Gregory Green (collectively "Plaintiffs") filed a Response (ECF No. 212), and Defendants filed a Reply (ECF No. 217).
I. BACKGROUND
On December 30, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Serve by Publication. (Mot. to Serve by Pub., ECF No. 205). Shortly thereafter, Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman granted Plaintiffs' Motion. (Order, ECF No. 206). Defendants subsequently filed the instant Motion (ECF No. 207) to reconsider Magistrate Judge Hoffman's Order.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
Local Rule IB 3-1 provides that "[a] district judge may reconsider any pretrial matter referred to a magistrate judge in a civil . . . case . . . where it has been shown that the magistrate judge's ruling is clearly erroneous or contrary to law." A ruling is clearly erroneous if the reviewing court is left with "a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Burdick v. C.I.R., 979 F.2d 1369, 1370 (9th Cir. 1992). The district judge may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand with instructions the ruling made by the magistrate judge. LR IB 3-1(b).
III. DISCUSSION
Defendants argue that "the Magistrate Judge's Order granting the motion to serve by publication should be vacated/denied, as the Defendants have not avoided service of process and the motion asserting such failed to actually make such required showing." (Mot. to Recons. 4:19-21, ECF No. 207). However, after Defendants filed the instant Motion, Plaintiffs successfully served Defendants. (Aff. of Service, ECF No. 210; Acceptance of Service, ECF No. 211; see also Reply 2:10-11, ECF No. 217). As a result, service by publication is no longer necessary. Accordingly, the Court denies Defendants' Motion requesting reconsideration of Judge Hoffman's Order as moot.
IV. CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 207) is DENIED.
DATED this 9 day of June, 2016.
/s/_________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Judge