Arcamone-Makinano v. Bureau of Land Management

D. Utah

Arcamone-Makinano v. Bureau of Land Management

District Court, D. Utah·Decided August 2, 2022·No. 2:21-cv-00458·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

AMELIA ARCAMONE-MAKINANO; BONIFACIO MAKINANI; GUILLERMO AVILA PAZ; RANDAL MASSARO; and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND CLIFTON ADUDDEL, RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 2:21-cv-00458-JNP-CMR

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LAND Judge Jill N. Parrish MANAGEMENT and AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS,

Defendants.

Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero issued a Report and Recommendation that the court deny defendant United States Bureau of Land Management’s (“BLM”) motion to dismiss (ECF No. 34), grant defendant American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’s (“ASPCA”) motion to dismiss (ECF No. 33), deny plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment (ECF No. 36), and deny as moot plaintiffs’ motion for a ruling (ECF No. 41). ECF No. 44. Judge Romero notified the parties that a failure to file a timely objection to her recommendation could waive any objections to it. No objection was filed within the allotted time. Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, any argument that it was in error has been waived. See United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). The court will decline to apply the waiver rule only if “the interests of justice so dictate.” Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). The court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and concludes it is not clearly erroneous. Thus, the court finds that the interests of justice do not warrant deviation from the waiver rule and ADOPTS IN FULL the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 44, is ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. BLM’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 34, is DENIED.

3. ASPCA’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 33, is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and REMAND to state court is not appropriate at this time. 4. Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment, ECF No. 36, is DENIED. 5. Plaintiffs’ motion for a ruling, ECF No. 41, is DENIED AS MOOT.

DATED August 1, 2022. BY THE COURT:

______________________________________ JILL N. PARRISH United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

AMELIA ARCAMONE-MAKINANO; BONIFACIO MAKINANI; GUILLERMO AVILA PAZ; RANDAL MASSARO; and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND CLIFTON ADUDDEL, RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 2:21-cv-00458-JNP-CMR

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LAND Judge Jill N. Parrish MANAGEMENT and AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS,

Defendants.

Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero issued a Report and Recommendation that the court deny defendant United States Bureau of Land Management’s (“BLM”) motion to dismiss (ECF No. 34), grant defendant American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’s (“ASPCA”) motion to dismiss (ECF No. 33), deny plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment (ECF No. 36), and deny as moot plaintiffs’ motion for a ruling (ECF No. 41). ECF No. 44. Judge Romero notified the parties that a failure to file a timely objection to her recommendation could waive any objections to it. No objection was filed within the allotted time. Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, any argument that it was in error has been waived. See United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). The court will decline to apply the waiver rule only if “the interests of justice so dictate.” Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). The court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and concludes it is not clearly erroneous. Thus, the court finds that the interests of justice do not warrant deviation from the waiver rule and ADOPTS IN FULL the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 44, is ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. BLM’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 34, is DENIED.

3. ASPCA’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 33, is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and REMAND to state court is not appropriate at this time. 4. Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment, ECF No. 36, is DENIED. 5. Plaintiffs’ motion for a ruling, ECF No. 41, is DENIED AS MOOT.

DATED August 1, 2022. BY THE COURT:

______________________________________ JILL N. PARRISH United States District Judge

Arcamone-Makinano v. Bureau of Land Management, (D. Utah 2022).

Pincite

Arcamone-Makinano v. Bureau of Land Management (Arcamone-Makinano v. Bureau of Land Management) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related