From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. SAI KRUPA, INC.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Oct 30, 2007
Civil Action No. 06-4972 (JAG) (D.N.J. Oct. 30, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-4972 (JAG).

October 30, 2007


ORDER


On October 2, 2007, Magistrate Judge Madeline Cox Arleo filed a Report and Recommendation ("R R"), pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) and L. Civ. R. 72(a)(2), wherein she recommended that the answers, affirmative defenses and counterclaim of defendant Sai Krupa, Inc. ("Sai Krupa") be stricken from the record, and that default be entered against Sai Krupa as a sanction for failing to secure counsel. The time for filing objections to the R R has expired and no objections were submitted.

A magistrate judge's recommended disposition of a dispositive matter is subject to de novo review. In re U.S. Healthcare, 159 F.3d 142, 145-46 (3d Cir. 1998); Temptations, Inc. v. Wager, 26 F. Supp 2d 740, 743 (D.N.J. 1998) see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). This Court has reviewed the parties' submissions and the R R under the appropriate de novo standard, and agrees with Magistrate Judge Arleo's analysis and conclusion. Therefore,

IT IS on this 29th day of October, 2007,

ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Arleo's R R is adopted as the opinion of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that Sai Krupa's answer, affirmative defenses and counterclaim (Docket Entry No. 13) be stricken from the record; and it is further

ORDERED that default be entered against Sai Krupa; and it is further

ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be served on all parties within seven (7) days of the date of this Order.


Summaries of

SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. SAI KRUPA, INC.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Oct 30, 2007
Civil Action No. 06-4972 (JAG) (D.N.J. Oct. 30, 2007)
Case details for

SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. SAI KRUPA, INC.

Case Details

Full title:SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC., Plaintiff, v. SAI KRUPA, INC., et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Oct 30, 2007

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-4972 (JAG) (D.N.J. Oct. 30, 2007)

Citing Cases

Sync Labs LLC v. Fusion Mfg.

Radulescu is simply mistaken that total inactivity is required to justify a Rule 41 dismissal; failure to…