Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air

D. Utah

Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air

DecidedFebruary 1, 2021

Docket2:19-cv-00756

StatusUnknown

This text of Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air (Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Utah primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air, (D. Utah 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

U . S . D IC SL TE RR ICK T COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

MATHEW CLYDE, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND Plaintiff, RECOMMENDATION

v. Case No. 2:19-cv-00756-JNP-CMR MY BUDDY THE PLUMBER, HEATING AND AIR, LLC; G&A PARTNERS – District Judge Jill N. Parrish UTAH, LLC; BRANDON DUNCAN; and DOES 1–10,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Mathew Clyde (“Plaintiff”) filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Add Additional Parties (the “Motion). ECF No. 28. Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero issued a Report and Recommendation that the Motion be denied because Plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) for modifying the scheduling order, Plaintiff failed to establish excusable neglect, and Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 19 or 21 required the addition of more defendants. ECF No. 67. Judge Romero notified Plaintiff that a failure to file a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation could waive any objections to it. Plaintiff did not file an objection within the allotted time. Because Plaintiff did not object to the Report and Recommendation, he waived any argument that it was in error. 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 that it is not clearly erroneous. Thus, the court finds that the interests of justice do not warrant deviation from the waiver rule. Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and Add Additional Parties (ECF No. 67) is ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Add Additional Parties (ECF No. 28) is DENIED.

DATED February 1, 2021. BY THE COURT

Jill N. Parrish United States District Court Judge

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

U . S . D IC SL TE RR ICK T COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

MATHEW CLYDE, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND Plaintiff, RECOMMENDATION

v. Case No. 2:19-cv-00756-JNP-CMR MY BUDDY THE PLUMBER, HEATING AND AIR, LLC; G&A PARTNERS – District Judge Jill N. Parrish UTAH, LLC; BRANDON DUNCAN; and DOES 1–10,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Mathew Clyde (“Plaintiff”) filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Add Additional Parties (the “Motion). ECF No. 28. Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero issued a Report and Recommendation that the Motion be denied because Plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) for modifying the scheduling order, Plaintiff failed to establish excusable neglect, and Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 19 or 21 required the addition of more defendants. ECF No. 67. Judge Romero notified Plaintiff that a failure to file a timely objection to the Report and Recommendation could waive any objections to it. Plaintiff did not file an objection within the allotted time. Because Plaintiff did not object to the Report and Recommendation, he waived any argument that it was in error. 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 that it is not clearly erroneous. Thus, the court finds that the interests of justice do not warrant deviation from the waiver rule. Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and Add Additional Parties (ECF No. 67) is ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Add Additional Parties (ECF No. 28) is DENIED.

DATED February 1, 2021. BY THE COURT

Jill N. Parrish United States District Court Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Clyde v. My Buddy the Plumber Heating and Air, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clyde-v-my-buddy-the-plumber-heating-and-air-utd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack