Peery v. Nixon Engineering,llc

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2018-cv-00358

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for {{13}} Report and Recommendations, GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART {{10}} Motion to Dismiss filed by Nixon Engineering, LLC. ORDERED that Defendant's objections to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge should be and hereby are OVERRULE. Signed by Judge Alan D Albright.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION JAYME PEERY, § Individually and on behalf of all § others similarly situated § Plaintiff § § Civil No. 6:18-C V-00358-ADA-JCM v. § § NIXON ENGINEERING, LLC, § Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske. Docket Number 13. The Report and Recommendation recommends that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. This action was referred to Judge Manske for findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, and Rule 1(d) of Appendix C of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The Report and Recommendation was filed on March 13, 2019. A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the Report and Recommendation, thereby securing 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 magistrate judge's proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation bars that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. See Douglas v. United Service Auto Ass 'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 1 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). In this case, Defendant timely filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation on March 27, 2019. Docket Number 15. In light of Defendant's objections, the Court has undertaken a de novo review of the case file in this action. The Court, having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's findings and conclusions and finding no error, will accept and adopt the Report and Recommendation for the reasons stated therein. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant's objections to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge should be and hereby are OVERRULED. Docket Number 15. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed in in this case is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED by the Court. Docket Number 13 SIGNED this 28th day of March 2019. UNITED STATES DISTRICT