Beast et al v. Snoop Doggy Dogg et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
SATISH DAT BEAST, RONALD
SATISH EMRIT, GO GO SATISH,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
SNOOP DOGGY DOGG, SNOOP
DOGGY DOG BOWL IN ARIZONA,
THE RACIST STATES OF ARIZONA,
NBC, COMCAST, NBC UNIVERSAL,
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, PEACOCK,
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC
COMMITTEE, MIKE TIRICO, CRIS
COLLINSWORTH, SUNDAY NIGHT
FOOTBALL, ROGER GOODELL,
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE,
KENDRICK LAMAR, JAY-Z, DR.
DRE, ICE CUBE, ESTATE OF EAZY
E "ERIC WRIGHT", SUPER BOWL
HALFTIME SHOW, BAD BUNNY,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CV 26-00006 HG-WRP
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO (1) DISMISS
COMPLAINT WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND AND (2) DENY APPLICATION TO
PROCEED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF FEES OR COSTS AS MOOT (ECF No. 5) and
DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ “NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL”
AS MOOT (ECF No. 6)
On February 11, 2026, the Magistrate Judge filed the
Findings and Recommendation. (ECF No. 5).
The Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties on
February 12, 2026.
On February 17, 2026, Plaintiffs filed a “Notice of
Interlocutory Appeal.” (ECF No. 6).
Case 1:26-cv-00006-HG-WRP Document 7 Filed 02/27/26 Page 1 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

A party may object to a magistrate judge’s Findings and
Recommendation within fourteen (14) days after being served.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); LR. 74.1(a). Any objection to the
Findings and Recommendation must specifically designate the
portions to which the party is objecting and the basis of the
objection. Id.
Plaintiffs are proceeding pro se. The Court liberally
construes Plaintiffs’ "Notice of Interlocutory Appeal." (ECF No.
6). Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam).
The filing is comprised of four pages of text, citation, and
pictures which are indecipherable to the Court. Plaintiffs do
not cite to any factual or legal basis for an “Interlocutory
Appeal,” nor do they put forth a cognizable objection to the
Findings and Recommendation. It is not clear what relief
Plaintiffs seek.
No objections to the Findings and Recommendation having been
filed by any party,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title
28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.1,
the Findings and Recommendation to (1) Dismiss Complaint Without
Leave to Amend and (2) Deny Application to Proceed Without
Payment of Fees or Costs as Moot (ECF No. 5) is ADOPTED AS THE
OPINION AND ORDER OF THIS COURT.
Plaintiffs' Notice of Interlocutory Appeal (ECF No. 6) does
2
Case 1:26-cv-00006-HG-WRP Document 7 Filed 02/27/26 Page 2 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

not contain any information that requires a change in the
Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffs'
Notice of Interlocutory Appeal (ECF No. 6) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: Honolulu, Hawaii, February 27, 2026.
Beast, et. al., v. Snoop Doggy Dogg, et al., 26-cv-00006-HG-WRP,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO (1) DISMISS
COMPLAINT WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND AND (2) DENY APPLICATION TO
PROCEED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF FEES OR COSTS AS MOOT (ECF No. 5) AND
DENYING PLAINTIFFS' “NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL” AS MOOT
(ECF No. 6)
3
Case 1:26-cv-00006-HG-WRP Document 7 Filed 02/27/26 Page 3 of 3
PageID.<pageID>