Giacometto Ranch Inc. v. Denbury Onshore LLC

1

GIACOMETTO RANCH INC., a Montana Corporation, TOM GIACOMETTO, a resident of Montana, and ROBERT GIACOMETTO, a resident of South Dakota Plaintiffs, v. DENBURY ONSHORE LLC, a Delaware Corporation, and DENBURY OPERATING COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants.

No. CV 16-145-BLG-SPW

United States District Court, D. Montana, Billings Division

January 19, 2024

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUSAN R. WATTERS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court are United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen DeSoto's Findings and Recommendations, filed January 4 2024. (Doc. 255). Judge DeSoto recommended the Court grant in part and deny in part Plaintiffs Giacometto Ranch Inc.'s Tom Giacometto's, and Robert Giacometto's Motion to Hold Denbury in Contempt, to Sanction Denbury, and to Continue Trial of Plaintiffs (Doc. 169).

The parties were required to file written objections within 14 days of the filing of Judge DeSoto's Findings and Recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Neither Plaintiffs nor Defendants objected to the Findings and Recommendations, and so

2

waived their right to de novo review of the record. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 149 (1985). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a “definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Government of Guam v. Guerrero, 11 F.4th 1052, 1059 (9th Cir. 2021) (quoting C.I.R. v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 291 (I960)). After reviewing the Findings and Recommendations, this Court does not find that Judge DeSoto committed clear error.

Accordingly IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Judge DeSoto's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 255) are ADOPTED IN FULL. Plaintiffs Motion (Doc. 169)...