The opinion of the court was delivered by: Pollak, J.
On February 3, 2012, the Honorable M. Faith Angell, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation concerning the Motion for Supplementary Relief in Aid of Execution filed by Plaintiff on November 14, 2011. Now pending before the court are Plaintiff's Objections and Exceptions to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, filed on February 13, 2012.
Upon de novo review, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), I find Plaintiff's objections to the Report and Recommendation unpersuasive. In particular, the requested relief is outside the scope of summary proceedings permitted under Rule 3118 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, in the Order that follows, the Report and Recommendation will be adopted in its entirety.
AND NOW, this 27th day of February, 2012, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable M. Faith Angell, United States Magistrate Judge; Plaintiff's Objections and Exceptions to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation; and Alliant Techsystems Inc.'s Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, it is hereby ORDERED that:
(1) The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
(2) Plaintiff's Request for Supplementary Relief against Alliant Techsystems, Inc. is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART;
(3) Plaintiff's motion for supplementary relief in the form of an Order enjoining Alliant Techsystems Inc. is DENIED;
(4) Plaintiff's motion for supplementary relief in the form of an Order requiring Alliant Techsystems Inc. to provide discovery is GRANTED as follows:
(a) Within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff is to provide proposed revised discovery requests directed to Alliant Techsystems Inc.;
(b) Within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, Alliant Techsystems Inc. is to provide a proposed protective order.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...