Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-akd-3_19-cv-00232/USCOURTS-akd-3_19-cv-00232-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 120
Nature of Suit: Marine Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

SPRUCE ROOT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SALLY N, Official Number 261250, 

its Engines, machinery, 

Appurtenances, etc., in rem; 

STEVEN P. JOHNSON, in 

personam; and M/V SALLY, in 

personam,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS

ORDER RE FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Before the Court at Docket 19, is Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. 

Defendant responded with a Partial Non-Opposition to Summary Judgment at 

Docket 21. Plaintiff replied at Docket 23, with a Notice of Reduced Attorney Fees 

Demand and Withdrawal of Limited Opposition to Summary Judgment. The 

motion was referred to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Deborah M. Smith. At 

Docket 25, Judge Smith issued her Final Report and Recommendation, in which 

she recommended that the motion for summary judgment be granted in the amount 

of $112,338.02 (including principal, interest and fees), plus per diem interest of 

$26.40 from July 19, 2019, and award Spruce Root, Inc. attorney fees in the 

Case 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS Document 26 Filed 02/13/20 Page 1 of 3
Case No. 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS, Spruce Root, Inc. v. SALLY N, et al.

Order re Final Report and Recommendation

Page 2 of 3

reduced amount of $3,936.50. No objections to the Final Report and 

Recommendation were filed.

The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). That 

statute provides that a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 

part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”1 A court is 

to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report 

or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”2

But as to those topics on which no objections are filed, “[n]either the Constitution 

nor [28U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)] requires a district judge to review, de novo, findings and 

recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct.”3 

The magistrate judge recommended that the Court grant the motion for 

summary judgment and the joint notice and stipulation. The Court has reviewed 

the Final Report and Recommendation and agrees with its analysis. Accordingly, 

the Court adopts the Final Report and Recommendation, and IT IS ORDERED that 

the Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. 

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter a Final Judgment for the Plaintiff in 

the amount of $112,338.02 (including principal, interest and fees), plus per diem 

1 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

2

Id.

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

474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court 

review of a magistrate’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, 

when neither party objects to those findings.”).

Case 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS Document 26 Filed 02/13/20 Page 2 of 3
Case No. 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS, Spruce Root, Inc. v. SALLY N, et al.

Order re Final Report and Recommendation

Page 3 of 3

interest of $26.40 from July 19, 2019, and award Spruce Root, Inc. attorney fees 

in the amount of $3,936.50.

DATED this 13th day of February, 2020 at Anchorage, Alaska.

/s/ Sharon L. Gleason

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-cv-00232-SLG-DMS Document 26 Filed 02/13/20 Page 3 of 3