VISIONMASTER INC v. ASC INTERNATIONAL, No. 2:2014cv00224 - Document 16 (D. Me. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: granting 8 Motion to Dismiss; adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 11 Report and Recommendations. for 8 Motion to Dismiss, filed by ASC INTERNATIONAL, 11 Report and Recommended Decision By JUDGE NANCY TORRESEN. (mjlt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
VISIONMASTER INC v. ASC INTERNATIONAL Doc. 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE VISIONMASTER, INC., Plaintiff, v. ASC INTERNATIONAL, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 2:14-cv-224-NT ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on December 3, 2014 his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 11). The Plaintiff filed its Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 12) on December 17, 2014. Defendant filed its Response to the Plaintiff’s Objection (ECF No. 13) on December 31, 2014. Without seeking permission pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, the Plaintiff filed a Reply brief (ECF No. 14).1 I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is As the Court has considered all the filings in making its de novo review. The Court denies as MOOT the Defendant’s motion to disregard the Plaintiff’s Reply brief. Defendant’s Objection to Filing of Reply Brief (ECF No. 15). 1 Dockets.Justia.com necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED. /s/ Nancy Torresen United States Chief District Judge Dated this 28th day of January, 2015. 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.
