District Court Adopts Report and Recommendation, Denies Judgment on the Pleadings, in Lanham Act Suit Challenging ‘Same Quality’ Claim:

Before the court are Defendant Blue Furniture Solutions, LLC's Second Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment per Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) (Clerk's Doe. No. 25), which incorporates by reference Defendant Blue Furniture Solutions, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment per Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(C) (Clerk's Doe. No. 13); and Plaintifrs Response to Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment under Federal Rule 12(c) (Clerk's Doe. No. 29). The motion was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation as to the merits. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; W.D. Tex. Appx C, R. 1(d). The magistrate judge filed his Report and Recommendation on March 3, 2017 (Clerk's Doc. No. 47), recommending that this court deny the motion.

A party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge within 14 days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, and thereby secure a de novo review by the District Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A party's failure to timely file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a Report and Recommendation bars that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-toproposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. See Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass 'n, 79 F .3 d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). The record reflects that the parties received the Report and Recommendation on March 3, 2017. Defendant timely filed objections on March 17, 2017 (Clerk's Doc. No. 51). On March 21, 2017, Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to Defendant's objections (Clerk's Doc. No. 53).

In light of Defendant's objections, the court has undertaken a de novo review of the motion, response, objections, response to objections, applicable law, and entire case file in this cause. The court concludes that the objections raise only issues thoroughly and properly addressed by the magistrate judge in his Report and Recommendation. Therefore, the court will overrule Defendant's objections and approve and adopt the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation as filed for substantially the reasons stated therein.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Objections to Report and Recommendation (Clerk's Doc. No. 51) are OVERRULED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Clerk's Doc. No. 47) is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED by the court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Blue Furniture Solutions, LLC's Second Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment per Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) (Clerk's Doc. No. 25) and Defendant Blue Furniture Solutions, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment per Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(C) (incorporated by reference in Defendant's second motion) (Clerk's Doc. No. 13) are DENIED.