-SKO King v. National Credit Works, Inc., No. 1:2010cv02413 - Document 22 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DENYING 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/4/2011. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 21 is DEEMED FILED as of the date of this order. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-SKO King v. National Credit Works, Inc. Doc. 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 SHERRI KING, CASE NO. 1:10-cv-02413-AWI-SKO 13 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT BE DENIED Plaintiff, 14 15 v. 16 17 (Docket No. 17, 20) NATIONAL CREDIT WORKS, INC.; and GREGORY G. EMMINGER, 18 Defendants. 19 / 20 On August 30, 2011, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that 21 Plaintiff's motion for default judgment be DENIED and that Plaintiff be permitted to amend her 22 complaint. (Doc. 20.) These Findings and Recommendations were served on all parties appearing 23 in the action and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fifteen (15) days after 24 service of the order. No objections were filed. 1 25 26 27 28 1 On September 9, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint. (Doc. 21.) As the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations were still pending and not yet adopted by the District Court, Plaintiff's amended complaint was filed without leave to do so pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ยง 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 2 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the 3 Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. 6 The Findings and Recommendations issued August 30, 2011, are ADOPTED IN FULL; 7 2. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is DENIED; and 8 3. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is DEEMED FILED as of the date of this 9 order. 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 Dated: 0m8i78 October 4, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
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.
