Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04907/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04907-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GIL CROSTHWAITE, et al., 

Plaintiffs,

 v.

MORA CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 04-04907 JSW

ORDER DENYING REQUEST

FOR SECOND AMENDED

JUDGMENT

The Court has received Plaintiffs’ request dated May 11, 2006, for a second amended

judgment reflecting Plaintiffs’ request that Defendants submit to an audit. On February 1, 2006,

Magistrate Maria Elena James issued a report and recommendation to grant Plaintiffs’ motion

for default judgment, without reference to Plaintiffs’ request to compel Defendants to submit to

an audit. This Court adopted the report and recommendation in full and issued a judgment on

February 27, 2006. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), Plaintiffs had 10 days to

file objections to the magistrate judge’s order. A party who fails to file timely objections “may

not thereafter assign as error a defect in the magistrate judge’s order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). 

The Court will not now consider an objection to the magistrate judge’s order dated February 1,

2006. Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for a second amended judgment is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-04907-JSW Document 48 Filed 05/19/06 Page 1 of 1