Opinion
20-62466-CIV-WILLIAMS
12-23-2021
TAMARA WAREKA, Plaintiff, v. FACES BY FRANCESCA, LLC, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS MATTER is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Alicia O. Valle's Report and Recommendation (“ the Report ”) (DE 15) on Plaintiff Tamara Wareka's (“ Plaintiff ”) Motion for Entry of Default Judgment and for Entry of a Permanent Injunction (“ the Motion ”) (DE 10) against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC (“ Defendant ”). In the Report, Judge Valle recommends that the Court grant in part and deny in part Plaintiff's Motion. (DE 15 at 11.) No. objections to the Report have been filed.
Upon an independent review of the Report, the record, and applicable case law, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. The conclusions in the Report (DE 15) are AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default Judgment and for Entry of a Permanent Injunction (DE 10) against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:
a. Plaintiff's request for default judgment is GRANTED.
b. Plaintiff's request for a permanent injunction against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC is GRANTED.
c. Plaintiffs request for statutory damages is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff shall be awarded $22,500.00 in statutory damages against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC.
d. Plaintiffs request for attorney's fees and costs is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff shall be awarded $2,100.00 in attorney's fees and $457.00 in costs.
3. The Court will separately enter an order of final default judgment and permanent injunction against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC.
4. After the Court enters its order of final default judgment and permanent injunction against Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC, the Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
In addition to Defendant Faces by Francesca, LLC, Plaintiff also brought this copyright infringement action against 10 unidentified Doe defendants. (See DE 1 at 3.) However, since Plaintiff initiated this action over a year ago, Plaintiff has failed to identify any of the Doe defendants or, at the very least, state what methods she has taken to identify the Doe defendants. Given Plaintiff's failure to prosecute her case against these Doe defendants, this case will also be dismissed as to these remaining defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
DONE AND ORDERED