Opinion
Case No. 11-50688
08-09-2011
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Lawrence Kemp Tennille, Defendant.
Honorable Arthur J. Tarnow
Senior United States District Judge
Honorable Paul Komives
United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION [11], ADOPTING THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [10], DENYING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS [15], DENYING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [19], DENYING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ORDER TO FORWARD DOCUMENTS [23], DENYING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR HEARING TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE [24], AND
DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR STATUS REPORT [18]
Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [10] of April 11, 2011. The Report and Recommendation recommends that Defendant's following motions should be denied: Motion for Production of Documents [15], Motion for Summary Judgment [19], Motion for Order to Forward Documents [23], Motion for Hearing to take Judicial Notice [24], and Motion for Status Report [18]. On May 2, 2011, Defendant filed an Objection [11]. Plaintiff did not file a Response.
The Court has reviewed the entire record and sees no basis for granting Defendant the relief he seeks in the motion. The Magistrate Judge properly denied the motions.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Objection [11] is OVERRULED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [10] of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motions for Production of Documents [15], for Summary Judgment [19], for Order to Forward Documents [23], for Hearing to take Judicial Notice [24], and for Status Report [18] are DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
ARTHUR J. TARNOW
United States Senior District Judge
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on August 9, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
Shawntel R. Jackson
Case Manager