Fidelity Deposit Company of Maryland v. Amaazz Construction Group LLC et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
FIDELITY DEPOSIT COMPANY OF
MARYLAND,
Plaintiff,
Case Number 2:21-cv-4384
v. 	JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.
Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura
AMAAZZ CONSTRUCTION GROUP,
LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation issued by the
Magistrate Judge on December 29, 2025. (ECF No. 98.) The Magistrate Judge recommends that
the Court direct the Clerk to enter default against Defendants Amaazz Construction Group, LLC
f/k/a Amaazz Group, LLC; Amaazz Construction Ohio, LLC; The Knoch Corporation; John A.
Johnson; Suguneswaran S. Suguness; Latha Johnson; and Susheela Suguness (collectively, the
“Amaazz Defendants”). (Id.)
As the Magistrate Judge explained, on November 3, 2025, the Court ordered Defendants
Amaazz Construction Group, LLC, Amaazz Construction Ohio, LLC and The Knoch
Corporation to retain new counsel and have them enter an appearance and ordered Defendants
John A. Johnson, Suguneswaran S. Suguness, Latha Johnson, and Susheela Suguness to clarify
their representation status. (ECF No. 95, PageID 1203–04.) The Court allowed 30 days for
compliance. (Id.) The Amaazz Defendants did not comply with the Court’s November 3 Order,
so, on December 4, 2025, the Court ordered the Amaazz Defendants to show cause within
fourteen days why the Clerk should not enter default against them as a sanction. (ECF No. 97.)
Case: 2:21-cv-04384-EAS-CMV Doc #: 99 Filed: 02/05/26 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
The Amaazz Defendants did not comply with the Court’s December 4 Order, either. Therefore,
the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court direct the Clerk to enter default against the
Amaazz Defendants as a sanction for their failure to comply with the Court’s Orders issued on
November 3, 2025, and December 4, 2025. (ECF No. 98.)
Once a magistrate judge issues a report and recommendation, the relevant statute
provides:
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file
written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by
rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file written objections to a magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation waives a de novo determination by the district court of any issues addressed in
the report and recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813, 814–15 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d,
474 U.S. 140 (1985); see also United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949–50 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Parties were advised of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation and
of the consequences of failing to do so. (ECF No. 98, PageID 1213.) No objections to the Report
and Recommendation were filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS (ECF No. 98) the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter default against Defendants
Amaazz Construction Group, LLC f/k/a Amaazz Group, LLC; Amaazz Construction Ohio, LLC;
The Knoch Corporation; John A. Johnson; Suguneswaran S. Suguness; Latha Johnson; and
Susheela Suguness.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to the Amaazz Defendants at the
following mailing and email addresses:
Case: 2:21-cv-04384-EAS-CMV Doc #: 99 Filed: 02/05/26 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

3
Amaazz Construction Group, LLC f/k/a Amaazz Group, LLC
Amaazz Construction Ohio, LLC
The Knoch Corporation
C/O Authorized Representative:
John A. Johnson
drjohnsonJ@gmail.com
Suguneswaran S. Suguness and Susheela Suguness
3559 Recurve Circle Sarasota, FL 34240
sugu.suguness@gmail.com
John Johnson and Latha Johnson
drjohnsonJ@gmail.com
This case remains open.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2/5/2026 	s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.
DATE 	EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case: 2:21-cv-04384-EAS-CMV Doc #: 99 Filed: 02/05/26 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>