Mesa Moving and Storage San Fran LLC v. Kova Products Incorporated

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Mesa Moving and Storage San Fran LLC, NO. CV-25-00796-PHX-ASB

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Kova Products Incorporated,

13 Defendant. 14 15 This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge Alison S. Bachus. (Doc. 8). On 16 February 20, 2026, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) 17 with this Court. (Doc. 20).1 The Magistrate Judge recommends granting Plaintiff’s 18 Renewed Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 19) and awarding damages for unpaid 19 services against Defendant Kova Products Inc. To date, no objections have been filed.

20 1 This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have 21 consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court pursuant to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part: 22 When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been 23 assigned pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(a)(1) considers dismissal to be appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) 24 due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge, 25 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and 26 Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee. 27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on 28 my behalf: Phoenix/Prescott: Senior United States District Judge Stephen M. McNamee 1 STANDARD OF REVIEW 2 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 3 recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. 4 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the service 5 of a copy of the Magistrate=s recommendation within which to file specific written 6 objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to object to a 7 Magistrate Judge=s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of the 8 Magistrate Judge=s factual findings and waives all objections to those findings on appeal. 9 See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to object to a Magistrate 10 Judge=s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the propriety of finding waiver 11 of an issue on appeal.” Id. 12 DISCUSSION2 13 Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s R&R and no Objections having been made 14 by any party thereto, the Court hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge’s R&R. The Court 15 further finds that entry of default judgment and a damages award of $305,945.84 is 16 appropriate in this matter. (See Doc. 20 at 8-9). 17 CONCLUSION 18 Accordingly, 19 IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate 20 Judge. (Doc. 20). 21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Default 22 Judgment. (Doc. 19). 23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Mesa Moving and Storage San Fran 24 LLC is entitled to judgment in the amount of $305,945.84 against Defendant Kova 25 Products, Inc. This amount shall be subject to post-judgment interest at the applicable 26 federal rate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). 27

28 2 The factual and procedural history of this case is set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20). 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs on or before April 10, 2026, pursuant to LRCiv 54.2. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action. 5 Dated this 13th day of March, 2026. 6 7 oe —_ Stephen M. McNamee 8 Senior United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_3-