Voltage Pictures, LLC. v. Martinez

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge

ORDER HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation [30] on July 2, 2015, in which he recommends that this Court grant Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment [23]. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, I am relieved of my obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings & Recommendation [30], and therefore, Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment [23] is granted. A judgment will be entered against Defendant, permanently enjoining him from infringing upon Plaintiffs' rights in their motion pictures and awarding statutory damages in the amount of $750. See 17 U.S.C. § 504 (c)(1).

Plaintiffs shall prepare a proposed judgment and submit it via email to my courtroom deputy, Michelle Rawson, within 7 days of the date below.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 11 day of August, 2015.

/s/_________

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ

United States District Judge