State of Tennessee v. Ideal Horizon Benefits, LLC

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE DIVISION

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ex rel. ) JONATHAN SKRMETTI, ATTORNEY ) GENERAL and REPORTER, and ) COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, ex ) 3:23-CV-00046-DCLC-JEM rel. DANIEL CAMERON, ATTORNEY ) GENERAL, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) IDEAL HORIZON BENEFITS, LLC d/b/a ) SOLAR TITAN USA, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER This matter is before the Court to consider the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the United States Magistrate Judge [Doc. 218], in which the magistrate judge recommends that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike [Doc. 166] the affirmative defenses of Defendants Atnip and Kelley and Defendant Kirkland be granted in part and denied in part. The parties failed to file objections to the R&R.1 See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). After thorough consideration of the R&R and the record as a whole, the Court finds that the R&R properly analyzes the issues presented. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the R&R [Doc. 218] is ADOPTED, and Plaintiffs’ motion to strike [Doc. 166] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants Atnip and Kelley’s Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth,

1 Failure to file objections within the 14-day period pursuant to Rule 72(b) results in waiver of the right to appeal the Court’s order. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-54 (1985). Seventh, and Twelfth affirmative defenses and Defendant Kirkland’s Third, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh and Twelfth affirmative defenses are hereby STRIKEN from their Answers. SO ORDERED:

s/ Clifton L. Corker United States District Judge