Icestone, LLC v. Matec S.R.L. et al, No. 1:2009cv01292 - Document 40 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 38 : Icestone's renewed motion for entry of final judgment by default against MATEC is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $224,967.00 against MATEC in damages, plus post-judgment interest to be calc ulated pursuant to the federal rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1961, along with costs. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and to dismiss this case. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 8/14/2012. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Icestone, LLC v. Matec S.R.L. et al Doc. 40 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------)( ICESTONE, LLC, NOT FOR PUBLICATION Plaintiff, ORDER 09-cv-1292 (CBA) (VVP) -against- MATEC, S.R.L., EUROSTONE MACHINE, and PYRAMID SUPPLY, INC., * AUG 1 !; 2012 * Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------)( AMON, Chief United States District Judge. Before this Court is a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") from Magistrate Judge Viktor Pohorelsky on plaintiff Icestone, LLC's renewed motion for entry of final judgment by default against MATEC, the sole remaining ·defendant in this action. This Court referred plaintiffs initial motion for entry of default judgment against MATEC to Judge Pohorelsky on November 9, 2010. On September 26, 2011, the Court adopted Judge Pohorelsky's R&R dated September 9, 2011, which found that although Icestone had established liability against MATEC for breach of contract, it had not sufficiently established damages. Consequently, the Court denied plaintiffs motion for entry of judgment by default without prejudice to a renewed motion that included certain requested information to support plaintiffs damages claims. As of January 17, 2012, Icestone had not taken any further action in this matter, and so the Court directed plaintiff to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Icestone responded on February 1, 2012. Upon recommendation from Judge Pohorelsky, the Court granted plaintiff a final opportunity to renew its motion for default judgment against MATEC on April 3, 2012, which Icestone did by letter dated April 23, 2012. On June 14, 2012, Dockets.Justia.com s/CBA
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
