Timilsina et al v. West Valley City, No. 2:2014cv00046 - Document 39 (D. Utah 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING 38 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re dismissing 19 Motion for Summary Judgment and granting 21 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 8/3/15 (alt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Timilsina et al v. West Valley City Doc. 39 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION ROBERT BIPLOVE TIMILSINA and BIG DADDY’S PIZZA RESTAURANT, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 2:14-cv-00046-DN-EJF WEST VALLEY CITY, a municipal corporation, and DOES 1-10, District Judge David Nuffer Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse Defendants. The Report and Recommendation 1 issued by United States Magistrate Judge Furse on July 1, 2015 recommends that West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 2 be GRANTED and Mr. Timilsina’s Motion for Summary Judgment 3 be DENIED. The parties were notified of their right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation within 14 days of service pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. 4 As of the date of this Order, no objection has been filed to the Report and Recommendation. De novo review of all materials, including the record that was before the magistrate judge and the reasoning set forth in the Report and Recommendation, has been completed. The analysis and conclusion of the magistrate judge are correct and the Report and Recommendation will be adopted. 1 Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), docket no. 38, entered July 1, 2015. 2 West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, docket no. 21, filed August 8, 2014. 3 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support of Thereof, docket no. 19, filed June 30, 2014. 4 See R&R at 24-25. Dockets.Justia.com Because there was no objection to granting West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, the relief requested by West Valley City—an order “dismissing Plaintiffs’ Complaint as a matter of law” 5—is awarded. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation 6 is ADOPTED. West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 7 is GRANTED and Mr. Timilsina’s Motion for Summary Judgment 8 is DENIED. The above-captioned matter is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to close the case. Dated August 3, 2015. BY THE COURT: ____________________________ David Nuffer United States District Judge 5 West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment at 1, docket no. 21, filed August 8, 2014. 6 Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), docket no. 38, entered July 1, 2015. 7 West Valley City’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, docket no. 21, filed August 8, 2014. 8 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support of Thereof, docket no. 19, filed June 30, 2014. 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.
