Overbay v. McDonald's Corporation et al (TV3)

Filing 24

ORDER in which the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the R&R [Doc. 23]. Defendants Quinton and Idom's Motion to Dismiss and/or to Strike [Doc. 12] is hereby DENIED and plaintiff's Motion to Extend Time to Serve Remaining Defendants [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. Plaintiff has an additional thirty (30) days from the entry of this order to effect service of process. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on April 13, 2017. (AYB)

Download PDF
  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE SABRINA ELAINE OVERBAY, Plaintiff, v. JOHN RAY ISRAEL, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.: 2:16-CV-337-TAV-MCLC ORDER This civil matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation entered by United States Magistrate Judge Clifton L. Corker, on March 24, 2017 (the “R&R”) [Doc. 23]. In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Corker recommends that defendants Michael Carroll Quinton and William Larry Idom’s Motion to Dismiss and/or to Strike [Doc. 12] be denied and plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to Serve Remaining Defendants [Doc. 16] be granted, giving plaintiff an additional thirty days to effect service of process. There have been no timely objections to the R&R, and enough time has passed since the filing of the R&R to treat any objections as having been waived. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. After a careful review of the matter, the Court is in agreement with Magistrate Judge Corker’s recommendations, which the Court adopts and incorporates into its ruling. As such, the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the R&R [Doc. 23]. Defendants Quinton and Idom’s Motion to Dismiss and/or to Strike [Doc. 12] is hereby DENIED and plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time to Serve Remaining Defendants [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. Plaintiff has an additional thirty (30) days from the entry of this order to effect service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Thomas A. Varlan CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?