Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc

N.D. Texas

Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc

DecidedFebruary 12, 2024

Docket1:23-cv-00028

StatusUnknown

This text of Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc (Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc, (N.D. Tex. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ABILENE DIVISION

CLOUD NETWORK TECHNOLOGY USA INC.,

Plaintiff, No. 1:23-CV-00028-H-BU v.

RRK TRUCKING INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

United States Magistrate Judge John R. Parker made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation (FCR) on January 26, 2024, regarding the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Dkt. No. 9), the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 11), and the defendant’s motion to defer consideration of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 24). Dkt. No. 39. No objections were filed, and the defendant has taken no action in this case since the Court granted defendant’s counsel’s motion to withdraw on November 20, 2023, see Dkt. No. 37, despite an order from the magistrate judge directing the defendant to show cause as to why it has not appeared through new counsel, see Dkt. No. 38. Where no specific objections are filed within the 14-day period, the Court reviews the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations only for plain error. Serrano v. Customs & Border Patrol, U.S. Customs & Border Prot., 975 F.3d 488, 502 (5th Cir. 2020). The Court has reviewed the FCR for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts and adopts the FCR (Dkt. No. 39). The Court strikes the defendant’s defenses and orders the Clerk to enter a default against the defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). Additionally, the Court denies the plaintiffs motion for default judgment without prejudice (Dkt. No. 9), denies the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as premature and without prejudice as to refiling (Dkt. No. 11), and denies the defendant’s motion to defer as moot (Dkt. No. 24). So ordered on February 12, 2024.

/ JAMES WESLEY HENDRIX UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ABILENE DIVISION

CLOUD NETWORK TECHNOLOGY USA INC.,

Plaintiff, No. 1:23-CV-00028-H-BU v.

RRK TRUCKING INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

United States Magistrate Judge John R. Parker made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation (FCR) on January 26, 2024, regarding the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (Dkt. No. 9), the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 11), and the defendant’s motion to defer consideration of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 24). Dkt. No. 39. No objections were filed, and the defendant has taken no action in this case since the Court granted defendant’s counsel’s motion to withdraw on November 20, 2023, see Dkt. No. 37, despite an order from the magistrate judge directing the defendant to show cause as to why it has not appeared through new counsel, see Dkt. No. 38. Where no specific objections are filed within the 14-day period, the Court reviews the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations only for plain error. Serrano v. Customs & Border Patrol, U.S. Customs & Border Prot., 975 F.3d 488, 502 (5th Cir. 2020). The Court has reviewed the FCR for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts and adopts the FCR (Dkt. No. 39). The Court strikes the defendant’s defenses and orders the Clerk to enter a default against the defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). Additionally, the Court denies the plaintiffs motion for default judgment without prejudice (Dkt. No. 9), denies the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as premature and without prejudice as to refiling (Dkt. No. 11), and denies the defendant’s motion to defer as moot (Dkt. No. 24). So ordered on February 12, 2024.

/ JAMES WESLEY HENDRIX UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cloud Network Technology USA Inc v. RRK Trucking Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cloud-network-technology-usa-inc-v-rrk-trucking-inc-txnd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack