Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Slocumb Law Firm, LLC v. 8X8, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Eastern Division

June 10, 2015

SLOCUMB LAW FIRM, LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
8X8, INC., Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

PAUL W. GREENE, Magistrate Judge.

On April 14, 2015, the above-styled matter was referred to the undersigned for review by United States District Judge Myron H. Thompson. (Doc. 3); see also 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b); Rule 72, Fed. R. Civ. P.; United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667 (1980); Jeffrey S. v. State Board of Education of State of Georgia, 896 F.2d 507 (11th Cir. 1990). This matter is before the court on a motion to compel arbitration and to stay these proceedings filed by Defendant 8x8, Inc. (Doc. 11). Plaintiff was ordered to show cause on or before June 3, 2015, why the motion should not be granted. Plaintiff did not respond to the order. As such, the motion is deemed unopposed.

Defendant filed into evidence an arbitration agreement that appears to demonstrate the mutual assent of the parties to arbitrate. Plaintiff's failure to oppose the motion notwithstanding, upon consideration of the motion, the relevant legal authority, and the proffered arbitration agreement, the Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the motion to compel arbitration and to stay these proceedings is due to be GRANTED. Pursuant to Sections 2, 3 & 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act, because Defendant requests a stay, the case must be stayed pending the outcome of arbitration proceedings.

It is ORDERED that the parties shall file any objections to the said Recommendation on or before June 24, 2015. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982). See Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982).

DONE and ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.