Thornton v. UPS, Inc.

Filing 49

JUDGMENT ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS and granting 25 Motion for Summary Judgment. Case dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on January 17, 2014. (tg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
HOT SPRINGS DIVISION
BRIAN H. THORNTON

VS.

PLAINTIFF

CASE NO. 12-CV-6044

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.

DEFENDANT

JUDGMENT
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed on October 23, 2013 by the
Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
(ECF No. 42). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement (ECF
No. 25) be granted. Plaintiff has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation and
Defendant has filed a response. (ECF Nos. 43-44). After reviewing the record de novo, the Court
adopts Judge Bryant’s Report and Recommendation as its own.
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint alleges claims for sexual harassment and retaliation under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. More specifically, Plaintiff alleges that
his male supervisor, Herb Washington, sexually harassed him and that he was retaliated against for
engaging in protected union activities. Judge Bryant recommends that Defendant’s summary
judgement motion be granted and that Plaintiff’s case be dismissed with prejudice. Judge Bryant
found that Plaintiff’s only sexual harassment evidence–his own uncorroborated affidavit–was
insufficient to demonstrate a triable fact issue. As to the retaliation claim, Plaintiff did not respond
to Defendant’s summary judgment arguments on this issue. Nonetheless, Judge Bryant examined
the retaliation evidence contained in Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and affidavit and found that it

was insufficient to demonstrate a triable fact issue.
Plaintiff has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, but he has not directed the
Court to any specific portion of the report that is in error. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Rather,
Plaintiff generally argues that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment should be denied because
Plaintiff’s evidence creates triable issues of fact. These arguments were adequately considered and
addressed in Judge Bryant’s Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Court will not rehash
them here.
The Court finds no error in Judge Bryant's conclusions. Accordingly, the Court overrules
Plaintiff’s objections and adopts Judge Bryant’s Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 42). For
the reasons stated herein and above, as well as those contained in the Report and Recommendation,
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement (ECF No. 25) should be and hereby is GRANTED.
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 17th day of January, 2014.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

2