UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE CO.,

Plaintiff,

v.

USA LUBE, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. 09-cv-13650

HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

(docket no. 27), GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 

PENNZOIL-QUAKER STATE’S REQUEST FOR DAMAGES

(docket no. 22), AND REINSTATING CERTAIN DEFENDANTS

Pennzoil-Quaker State Company ("PQS") originally filed this Lanham Act claim against

several companies using "Pennzoil" marks without appropriate authorization -- a holding

company, and its owners Ali A. Karnib and Fawzi Mourtada, in 2009. Defendants never

answered the complaint or opposed the action, and the Court entered a default judgment

on June 21, 2010. Order, June 21, 2010, ECF No. 22. The Court asked the magistrate

judge to make a determination on the matter of damages on August 31, 2010. The case

was reassigned to this judicial officer pursuant to Administrative Order 10-AO-037 on

December 22, 2010. 

In a Report and Recommendation ("Report") issued on June 6, 2011, the magistrate

judge recommended lost profits damages of $299,500, plus pre- and post-judgment

interest, based on oil change proceeds PQS lost during the period of infringement. She

also denied PQS's request for attorney's fees for failure to provide sufficient information on

2:09-cv-13650-SJM-MKM Doc # 29 Filed 07/29/11 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 276
which to base such an award. The Court will adopt the Report and enter a judgment in

accordance with its recommendations. 1

Civil Rule 72(b) governs review of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 

De novo review of the magistrate judge’s findings is only required if the parties “serve and

file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations.” Fed. R. Civ.

P. 72(b)(2). Nevertheless, because a district judge always retains jurisdiction over a motion

after referring it to a magistrate judge, he is entitled to review the magistrate judge's

findings of fact and conclusions of law on his own initiative See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S.

140, 154 (1985) (clarifying that while a district court judge need not review a report and

recommendation “de novo if no objections are filed, it does not preclude further review by

the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other

standard”).

Neither Defendants nor PQS filed objections to the Report. Therefore, no de novo

review of the motions is required. Having reviewed the Report's analysis, in light of the

record developed in this case, the Court finds that the Report's conclusions are factually

based and legally sound. Accordingly, it will adopt the Report's findings.

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report (docket no. 27) is ADOPTED,

and PQS's request for damages (docket no. 22) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN

PART. An appropriate judgment against US Lube, Inc., and Waterford's Lube, Inc., in the

 1 The magistrate judge suggested that the Court rescind its text-only order of June 21,

2010, which erroneously terminated several Defendants from the case. The Court will

rescind that order as to all affected Defendants, with the exception of Ali Karnib, who

recently filed for bankruptcy and is now protected by the automatic stay. See 11 U.S.C. §

362. That leaves US Lube, Inc. and Waterford's Lube, Inc. answerable to the Court's

judgment.

2

2:09-cv-13650-SJM-MKM Doc # 29 Filed 07/29/11 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 277
amount of $299,500.00, with pre- and post- judgment interest, will issue in conjunction with

this Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court's "text only" order of June 21, 2010, is

RESCINDED, in accordance with the magistrate judge's recommendation.

SO ORDERED.

s/Stephen J. Murphy, III 

STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

United States District Judge

Dated: July 29, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or

counsel of record on July 29, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

Carol Cohron 

Case Manager

3

2:09-cv-13650-SJM-MKM Doc # 29 Filed 07/29/11 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 278