Southwest Heritage Bank v. Steven C Coury, et al.

1 WO 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8 Southwest Heritage Bank, No. CV-25-00047-PHX-JZB 9 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Steven C Coury, et al., 12 Defendants.

14 This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle. On November 3, 2025, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation with this Court.1 (Doc.

16 44). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant the Parties’ Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment (Doc. 35). To date, no objections have been filed.

1 This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court pursuant to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part: When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been 22 assigned pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(a)(1) considers dismissal to be appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) 23 due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and 25 Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee.

26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on 27 my behalf: 28 Phoenix/Prescott: Senior United States District Judge Stephen M.

McNamee 1 STANDARD OF REVIEW 2 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the service of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific written objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id. 12 DISCUSSION 13 Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 44). Moreover, the Court grants the parties’ Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement. (Doc. 35).

18 CONCLUSION 19 Accordingly, 20 IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 44).

22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting judgment to Plaintiff Southwest Heritage Bank against Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury Ford, LLC pursuant to the terms of the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment. (Doc. 35).

25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the parties to notify the Court by January 23, 2026 whether full performance and obligations under the Settlement Agreement have been achieved. In absence of such notice, and in the absence of whether a motion to extend this deadline or a stipulated motion to dismiss Defendants Steven C.

1 || Coury and Steve Coury Ford, LLC, then Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury 2|| Ford, LLC shall be dismissed with prejudice.

3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury Ford, LLC shall be dismissed with prejudice upon full performance of obligations under || the Settlement Agreement.

6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).

8 Dated this 17th day of November, 2025.

10 — lg oe Stephen M. McNamee 11 Senior United States District Judge -3-