Hines v. D&S Residential Services et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, DISMISSING DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS AND DIRECTING CLERK TO ISSUE PROCESS ON REMAINING RETALIATION CLAIM. Signed by Chief Judge J. Daniel Breen on 7/20/15. (Breen, J.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DIVISION DAVIS HINES, Plaintiff, v. No. 14-1266 D&S RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, et al., Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________________ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, DISMISSING DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS AND DIRECTING CLERK TO ISSUE PROCESS ON REMAINING RETALIATION CLAIM _____________________________________________________________________________ The Plaintiff, Davis Hines, initially brought this pro se action on October 7, 2014 alleging retaliation and discrimination based on race and gender in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e, et seq. (D.E. 1.) On May 7, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge Edward G. Bryant directed Plaintiff to amend his complaint in order to cure certain insufficiencies therein. (D.E. 6.) An amended pleading was filed on June 5, 2015. (D.E. 9.) In a report and recommendation entered June 29, 2015, the magistrate judge recommended that Hines' discrimination claims be dismissed and the retaliation claim be permitted to proceed. (D.E. 10.) Judge Bryant also recommended that service be issued. As no objections have been filed and upon review of the record, the report and recommendation is hereby ADOPTED in its entirety. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's discrimination claims are DISMISSED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to issue process for the Defendants named in the amended complaint and to deliver such process to the United States Marshal for service. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of July 2015. s/ J. DANIEL BREEN 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?