Evans et al v. Skolnik et al

Filing 122

ORDER OVERRULING P Witherow's 118 Objections, and affirming and adopting 117 Report and Recommendation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ICS's 83 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that GTL's 99 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Embarq's 85 combined motion is GRANTED as to the Motion to Dismiss, and DENIED as to its Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that P Witherow's 104 Motion to Stay Summary Judgment is DENIED as MOOT Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 11/5/2009. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

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 B e fo re the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (#117) of M a g is tra te Judge Valerie P. Cooke, entered October 2, 2009, as well as Plaintiff W ith e ro w 's Objections (#118) thereto, and Defendants' Responses (#'s 119, 120, 121) on file herein. T h e Court has conducted a review of the record in this case and determines that Plaintiff John Witherow's Objections (#118) the Report and Recommendations (#117) o n file herein are OVERRULED as Mr. Witherow raises no new facts or legal theories to contest the Magistrate Judge's decision. Therefore, the Court finds that the Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n s (#117) of the United States Magistrate Judge entered October 2, 2009 s h o u ld be affirmed. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Cooke's Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n (#117) be affirmed and adopted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ICS's Motion to Dismiss (#83) is GRANTED. vs. H O W A R D SKOLNIK, et al., D e fe n d a n ts . D O N A L D YORK EVANS, et al., P la in tiffs , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 3 :0 8 -c v -0 0 3 5 3 -R C J -V P C ORDER U N I T E D STATES DISTRICT COURT D I S T R I C T OF NEVADA

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that GTL's Motion to Dismiss (#99) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Embarq's combined Motion to Dismiss and M o tio n for Summary Judgment (#85) is GRANTED as to the Motion to Dismiss, and th a t its Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Witherow's Motion to Stay S u m m a ry Judgment (#104) is DENIED as MOOT. DATED: N o v e m b e r 5, 2009

___________________________________ R o b e rt C. Jones U n ite d States District Judge

Page 2 of 2