Sun v. GTV Media Group Inc.

Opinion

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------- X : WEIGUO SUN, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 21 Civ. 4529 (LGS) -against- : : ORDER GTV MEDIA GROUP INC., et al., : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------X

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, by the Default Judgment Order dated October 14, 2021, Plaintiffs were granted judgment against Defendants Lihong Wei Lafrenz and Voice of Guo Media, Inc. (together, the “Defaulting Defendants”). Plaintiffs’ request for damages was then referred to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott for a post-default-judgment inquest; WHEREAS, on September 9, 2022, Judge Cott issued a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) recommending that (1) the inquest into damages be consolidated with the damages component of the trial against the appearing Defendants or (2) the default judgment previously entered against Defaulting Defendants be vacated without prejudice to refiling after the claims against the appearing Defendants are resolved; WHEREAS, as stated in the Report, the deadline for any objections was fourteen days from service of the Report; WHEREAS, on September 22, 2022, counsel for Plaintiffs filed a certificate of service stating that Defaulting Defendants had been served with a copy of the Report on September 22, 2022; WHEREAS, no objections were timely filed; WHEREAS, in reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district judge is required to “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to” by any party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); accord United States v. Romano, 794 F.3d 317, 340 (2d Cir. 2015); WHEREAS, the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record as to Judge Cott’s recommendations. It is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Report is ADOPTED in full. The default judgment against Defaulting Defendants at Dkt. No. 71 is VACATED without prejudice to refiling after the claims against the appearing Defendants are resolved. Dated: January 5, 2023 New York, New York

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE