Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00840-RWS-KPJ
06-12-2020
TIGI LINEA CORP., Plaintiff, v. PROFESSIONAL PRODUCTS GROUP, LLC, Defendant.
ORDER
Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff Professional Products Group, LLC ("PPG") filed an Amended Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Docket No. 13. The Court previously referred this matter to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 77), recommending the motion be denied because PPG failed to demonstrate a substantial threat of irreparable harm.
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report have been filed, neither party is entitled to de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations, and except upon grounds of plain error, they are barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court. 28 U.S.C § 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the motion and the Magistrate Judge's report and agrees with the report. See United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 683 (1980) ("[T]he statute permits the district court to give to the magistrate's proposed findings of fact and recommendations 'such weight as [their] merit commands and the sound discretion of the judge warrants.' ") (quoting Mathews v. Weber, 23 U.S. 261, 275 (1976)). Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation (Docket No. 77) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. PPG's Amended Expedited Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 13) is DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12th day of June, 2020.
/s/_________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE