Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01107/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01107-1/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

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FARROW et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GENUINE PARTS COMPANY MEDICAL

PLAN et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 11cv1107 AJB (BLM)

ORDER (1) ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION, (2)

GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

TO ENFORCE THE TERMS OF THE

SETTLEMENT, AND (3) DISMISSING

THE CASE WITH PREJUDICE

[Docs. 31, 37]

Presently before the Court is Defendants’ motion to enforce the terms of the settlement stated on

the record on November 18, 2011. (Doc. 31.) The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Barbara

Lynn Major, who issued a report and recommendation that the Court grant Defendants’ motion and

dismiss the case with prejudice. (Doc. 37.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district judge’s

duties in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The district judge must

“make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made,” and “may

accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the finding or recommendations made by the magistrate

judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989).

However, in the absence of timely objection(s), the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear

1 11cv1107

Case 3:11-cv-01107-AJB-BLM Document 38 Filed 06/27/12 Page 1 of 2
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

error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory

Committee Notes (1983); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

Neither party has timely filed objections to Magistrate Judge Major’s report and recommendation. (See Doc. 37 at 8 (objections due by June 8, 2012).) Having reviewed the report and recommendation, the Court finds that it is thorough, well reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the

Court hereby (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Major’s report and recommendation, (2) GRANTS

Defendants’ motion to enforce the terms of the settlement, and (3) DISMISSES the instant case with

prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 27, 2012

Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia

U.S. District Judge

K:\COMMON\BATTAGLI\DJ CASES\2 Orders to be filed\11cv1107 Order Adoping R&R.wpd 2 11cv1107

Case 3:11-cv-01107-AJB-BLM Document 38 Filed 06/27/12 Page 2 of 2