Broadbent et al v. Americans For Affordable Healthcare Inc et al

Filing 206

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 192 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, defendants National Combined Benefits Association, Gary Bastie, Roberta Bastie, Jack Winebrenner and L.M. Winebrenners (collectively referred to as AIM Def endants) motions to dismiss (Docs. 88, 116) and defendant Ashley Atleys motion for judgment as a matter of law (Doc. 100) are DENIED without prejudice. Defendants are permitted to re-file such motions after the filing of plaintiffs second amended complaint.AIM Defendants motion for leave to file a cross-claim (Doc. 138) is DENIED.. Signed by Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott. (wam1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

Bailey Broadbent, et al.,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
Americans for Affordable Healthcare,
Inc., et al.,
Defendant(s).

:
:
:
:
:
:

Case Number: 1:10cv943
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott

:
:
:
ORDER

This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States
Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge
reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on December 16, 2011 a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 192). Subsequently, the defendant Ashley Atley filed objections to such
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 196) and plaintiffs filed a memorandum in opposition to
defendant Ashley Atley’s objections (Doc. 200).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and
considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the
Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, defendants’ National Combined Benefits Association, Gary Bastie, Roberta
Bastie, Jack Winebrenner and L.M. Winebrenner’s (collectively referred to as “AIM
Defendants”) motions to dismiss (Docs. 88, 116) and defendant Ashley Atley’s motion for
judgment as a matter of law (Doc. 100) are DENIED without prejudice. Defendants are

permitted to re-file such motions after the filing of plaintiffs’ second amended complaint.
AIM Defendants’ motion for leave to file a cross-claim (Doc. 138) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

___s/Susan J. Dlott___________
Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott
United States District Court