Doby-Johnson v. Nash et al

Filing 28

ORDER adopting 26 Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Court denies GE's 10 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 3/27/14. (kmca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
Tenisha Doby-Johnson,
Plaintiff,
v.
Ralph Nash, Venture Aerobearings, LLC,
Charlie Alloco, Ron Hambrick,
Serge Couture, and General Electric
Company,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2: 13-cv-3253-RMG
c:::»
""

)

~ ~

ORDER

'J

j

=.1

:" ')

,: '~

.,'

I

-=-

3:

::z::::0

N

....J

-,

,

)

»
-Ii>
...0

::0
rt1

(")

~

<:

rt1
CJ
(")

r-

rt1
::0

;::s;:

u;

0
...,

.."

n

,."

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the
Magistrate Judge recommending that this Court deny Defendant General Electric Company's
("GE") motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 26). For the reasons set forth below, the Court agrees with
and adopts the R&R as the order of the Court.
Background

Plaintiff filed this action in state court alleging discrimination in her employment. (Dkt.
No.1-I). Defendants then removed the action to this Court. (Dkt. No.1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(g), this matter was automatically referred a
Magistrate Judge for pretrial proceedings. GE then filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule
12(b)(6) contesting Plaintiffs ability to pierce its corporate veil. (Dkt. No. 10). Plaintiff then
filed a response in opposition to the motion. (Dkt. No. 17). The Magistrate Judge then issued
the present R&R recommending the motion be denied. (Dkt. No. 26). Neither party filed timely
objections to the R&R.

Legal Standard

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with
this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making
a de novo determination of those portions of the R&R to which specific objection is made.
Additionally, the Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court may also
"receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Id.
Discussion

After review of the R&R and finding no clear error on the face of the record, the Court
finds the Magistrate Judge applied sound legal principles to the facts of this case and therefore
agrees with and adopts the R&R as the order of the Court. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident
Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310,315 (4th Cir. 2005).
Conclusion

As set forth above, the Court agrees with and adopts the R&R as the order of the Court.
(Dkt. No. 26). Accordingly, the Court denies GE's motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 10).
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

Richard Mark Gergel
United States District Court Judge
MarchL -, ,2014
Charleston, South Carolina

2