Morse Electric, Inc. v. Stearns Conrad and Schmidt Consulting Engineers, Inc.

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
MORSE ELECTRICT, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 22-91-JWB
STEARNS, CONRAD AND SCHMIDT
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the December 21, 2023, Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) (Doc. 64) by United States Magistrate Judge Gerald L. Jackson, which recommended
that Plaintiff’s motion to stay and compel arbitration (Doc. 51) be DENIED. 	The R&R is
incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Plaintiff was advised that specific written objections were due within 14 days after being
served with a copy of the R&R. (Doc. 64 at 7.) That time has now passed and Plaintiff has not
filed an objection. Plaintiff’s failure to object leaves it with no entitlement to appellate review.
Williams v. United States, No. 19-2476-JAR-JPO, 2019 WL 6167514, at *1 (D. Kan. Nov. 20,
2019) (citing United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996)). “In
the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate’s report under any
standard it deems appropriate.” Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985)).
The court agrees with the reasoning of Magistrate Judge Jackson’s analysis and
recommendation and finds that “there is no clear error on the face of the record.” See Fed. R. Civ.
6:22-cv-00091-JWB-GLJ Document 65 Filed in ED/OK on 01/23/24 Page 1 of 2

2
P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note. 	Thus, the court ADOPTS the R&R as the findings and
conclusions of this court. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to stay and compel arbitration (Doc. 51)
is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 23rd day of January 2024.
__ s/ John Broomes__________
JOHN W. BROOMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6:22-cv-00091-JWB-GLJ Document 65 Filed in ED/OK on 01/23/24 Page 2 of 2