Summary
holding lawsuit challenging allegedly fraudulent statements in special motion to strike and appellate briefing burdened defendant's petitioning rights
Summary of this case from Wilson v. Leigh Law Grp.Opinion
Case No. CV 14-2179-MMM (JEM)
01-23-2015
JANN WILLIAMS, et al., Plaintiff, v. JONES & JONES MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC., et al. Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the pleadings, all the records and files herein, and the Final Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffs have filed Objections, and the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Final Report and Recommendation to which Plaintiffs have objected. The Court concurs with and accepts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
On October 21, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the motion, Plaintiffs suggest the Court should reconsider the Final Report and Recommendation due to fraud and misconduct by Defendants, and largely repeat the claims and arguments set forth by Plaintiffs in their Complaint and motion papers. The Final Report and Recommendation is not a final judgment, order, or proceeding, as required for relief under Rule 60(b). Therefore, to the extent the motion seeks relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding, it is denied as premature.
To the extent the motion for reconsideration asserts additional objections to the Final Report and Recommendation, the Court has considered the additional arguments set forth in the motion.
On January 8, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a Request for Judicial Notice. Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice is denied as moot as taking judicial notice of the requested matters would not alter this Court's decision.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Defendants' motions to dismiss (Docket Nos. 11, 14-15) be granted; (2) Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed without leave to amend; (3) Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 33) be denied; (4) Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions (Docket No. 25) be denied; (5) Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No. 42) be denied as premature; (6) Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice (Docket No. 43) be denied as moot; and (7) this action be dismissed in its entirety, (A) with prejudice as to Plaintiffs' claims under federal law against Defendants Jones & Jones Management Group, Freeman, Freeman & Smiley, Curtis Graham, and Deborah Friedman, and (B) without prejudice as to (i) Plaintiffs' claims under state law and (ii) Plaintiffs' federal law claims against Defendants Holly Kendig, Rex Heeseman, Walter Croskey, and Joan D. Klein. DATED: January 23, 2015
/s/_________
MARGARET M. MORROW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE