Southwest Heritage Bank v. Coury et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Southwest Heritage Bank,
Plaintiff,
v.
Steven C Coury, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-00047-PHX-JZB
ORDER
This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle. On November 3,
2025, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation with this Court.1 (Doc.
44). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant the Parties’ Stipulated
Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment (Doc. 35). To date, no objections have been
filed.
1 	This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have
consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court
pursuant to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part:
When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been
assigned 	pursuant 	to 	Local 	Rule 	3.7(a)(1) 	considers 	dismissal 	to 	be
appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1)
due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent
to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge,
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and
Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court
Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on
my behalf:
Phoenix/Prescott: 	Senior 	United 	States 	District 	Judge 	Stephen 	M.
McNamee
Case 2:25-cv-00047-SMM-JZB Document 47 Filed 11/17/25 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v.
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the
service of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific
written objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to
object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo
review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those
findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to
object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the
propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id.
DISCUSSION
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no
Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and
adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 44). Moreover, the
Court grants the parties’ Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment pursuant to the terms
of the settlement agreement. (Doc. 35).
CONCLUSION
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge. (Doc. 44).
IT 	IS 	FURTHER 	ORDERED 	granting 	judgment 	to 	Plaintiff 	Southwest
Heritage Bank against Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury Ford, LLC pursuant
to the terms of the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Stipulated Judgment. (Doc. 35).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the parties to notify the Court by
January 	23, 	2026 	whether 	full 	performance 	and 	obligations 	under 	the 	Settlement
Agreement have been achieved. In absence of such notice, and in the absence of whether
a motion to extend this deadline or a stipulated motion to dismiss Defendants Steven C.
Case 2:25-cv-00047-SMM-JZB Document 47 Filed 11/17/25 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Coury and Steve Coury Ford, LLC, then Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury
Ford, LLC shall be dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Steven C. Coury and Steve Coury
Ford, LLC shall be dismissed with prejudice upon full performance of obligations under
the Settlement Agreement.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment
accordingly. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
Dated this 17th day of November, 2025.
Case 2:25-cv-00047-SMM-JZB Document 47 Filed 11/17/25 Page 3 of 3