1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 MAGLULA, LTD., ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:18-cv-00842-GMN-VCF 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER HANGZHOU GOODTOOLS CO., LTD., et ) 7 al., ) ) 8 Defendants. ) ) 9

10 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States 11 Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach, (ECF No. 21), which recommends that Plaintiff Maglula, 12 Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff’s”) Renewed Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 19), be granted in part 13 and denied in part. Specifically, the R&R makes three recommendations: (1) the Court enter 14 final judgment against Defendant Anthony Lee (“Defendant”); (2) the Court enter a permanent 15 injunction that enjoins Defendant from infringing Plaintiff’s patents; and (3) the Court deny 16 Plaintiff’s request for attorney fees. (R&R 10:1–8). Neither party objected to the R&R. 17 Regarding Plaintiff’s request for attorney fees, Judge Ferenbach accepted Plaintiff’s 18 allegations of Defendant’s willful infringement and bad faith litigation as true, but he 19 concluded that the Court could not award fees and costs absent evidence that the request is 20 reasonable. (Id. 9:12–15). To determine whether the request is reasonable the Court needs, “(1) 21 contemporaneous billing records, (2) counsel’s hourly rate, and (3) evidence that this rate is 22 reasonable for an attorney of his or her skill and experience.” (Id. 9:16–23). Accordingly, the 23 R&R recommends denying Plaintiff’s request for fees “unless Plaintiff provides sufficient 24 documentation” for the Court to conclude that the request is reasonable. (Id. 10:3–5). Plaintiff 25 did not file the requested documentation. 1 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 2 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4.

(b)(1)(B); 3 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 4 determination of those portions to which objections are made.

The Court may accept, reject, 5 or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 6

(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is 7 not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 8 objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized 9 that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 10 where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia,

, 11 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 12 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so, June 27, 2019, has passed. 13 (R&R 10:10–19). 14 Accordingly, 15 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 21), is 16 ADOPTED in full. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Default Judgment, 18 (ECF No. 19), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request that Default Judgment be entered 20 against Defendant, (Ren. Mot. Default Judgment 10:9–14:14, ECF No. 19), is GRANTED. 21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for a Permanent Injunction 22 against Defendant’s infringement of its patents, (Ren. Mot. Default Judgment 14:15–16:26, 23 ECF No. 19), is GRANTED. 24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the Court’s Permanent Injunction, 25 Defendant is enjoined from: 1 1) Mailing the QBLoader Pistol Magazine Loader & Unloader, or other similarly 2 infringing product (collectively, “Infringing Products”), to the United States or 3 importing Infringing Products into the United States; 4 2) Making, using, offering to sell, selling, or distributing Infringing Products in the 5 United States, either directly or indirectly; 6 3) Assisting any other entities in making, using, ordering, purchasing, selling, 7 offering for sale, or distributing Infringing Products in the United States or 8 importing Infringing Products into the United States; 9 4) Advertising, offering for sale, or selling Infringing Products on Amazon.com, 10 eBay.com, Walmart.com, Wish.com, Alibaba.com, and other websites that are 11 directed toward U.S. customers; 12 5) Assisting any entities in advertising, offering for sale, or selling Infringing 13 Products on Amazon.com, eBay.com, Walmart.com, Wish.com, Alibaba.com, 14 and other websites that are directed toward U.S. customers; and 15 6) Advertising, showing, exhibiting, selling, or offering to sell Infringing Products 16 in the United States, including at tradeshows. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for attorney fees, (Ren. Mot. 18 Default Judgment 3:10–11, 17:10–12, ECF No. 19), is DENIED without prejudice. 19 The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. 20 DATED this __7___ day of October, 2019. 21 22 23 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 24 United States District Court 25