Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-00433/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-00433-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

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 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Dream Games of Arizona Incorporated, et 

al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

PC Onsite LLC, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-03-00433-PHX-DLR

ORDER 

 Before the Court is Plaintiff Dream Games of Arizona, Inc.’s (“Judgment 

Creditor”) Application for Charging Order and United States Magistrate Eileen S. 

Willett’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). (Docs. 522, 541.) The R&R 

recommends that the Court grant the Application and issue a charging order in the form 

proposed by Judgment Creditor. (Doc. 541 at 8.) Magistrate Judge Willett advised the 

parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file 

timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. 

(Id. at 8-9 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 

(9th Cir. 2003)). No party filed objections, thus relieving the Court of its obligation to 

review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 

(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 

not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 

Case 2:03-cv-00433-DLR Document 542 Filed 04/18/16 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

objected to.”). The Court nonetheless has reviewed the R&R and finds that it is welltaken. The Court will accept the R&R, grant Judgment Creditor’s Application, and issue 

the charging order in the form proposed by the Judgment Creditor. See 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 

part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) 

(“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive 

further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). 

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Willett’s R&R, (Doc. 541), is 

ACCEPTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Judgment Creditor’s Application for Charging 

Order, (Doc. 522), is GRANTED. 

IT IS FUTHER ORDERED that a charging order against the interest or interests 

of Judgment Debtor, Casey Hagon, in C&D Consulting LLC, a Texas limited liability 

company, is GRANTED and such interest or interests shall be charged with payment of 

the unsatisfied amount of the Judgment debt owing to Judgment Creditor, with interest 

thereon until paid. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that C&D Consulting, LLC shall provide 

Judgment Creditor with quarterly financial statements and an accounting of all 

disbursements to Judgment Debtor, or for the benefit of Judgment Debtor, within 21 days

after the conclusion of each calendar quarter, from the date of this Order until the 

Judgment is fully satisfied. Such documents shall be mailed to Windtberg & 

Zdancewicz, PLC, 7551 S. Willow Dr., Suite 102, Tempe, Arizona 85283, or such other 

address as provided by Judgment Creditor. 

 Dated this 18th day of April, 2016. 

Douglas L. Rayes 

United States District Judge

Case 2:03-cv-00433-DLR Document 542 Filed 04/18/16 Page 2 of 2