Summary
holding that a defendant's "failure to serve [a plaintiff] during the safe-harbor period with the same motion for sanctions that it later filed with the Court indicates that it has not strictly complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 11(c)" and collecting cases
Summary of this case from Stewart v. Treasure Bay, LLCOpinion
No. 3:11-cv-1656-M
03-18-2014
SORTIUMUSA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. ERIC HUNGER, ET AL., Defendants.
ORDER
The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation in this case. Plaintiff filed objections on March 5, 2014, and the District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation to which objection was made. The objections are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.
Defendant Big Time's Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions [Dkt. No. 104] is DENIED for failure to abide by the safe-harbor provision of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(c)(2). Defendants Eric Hunger and Chicago American Manufacturing, LLC's Motion for Sanctions [Dkt. No. 98] is DENIED on its merits.
SO ORDERED this 18th day of March, 2014.
/s/_________
BARBARA M. G. LYNN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS