Xiao et al v. Napolitano et al

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTING 32 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Daniel M. Renaud, Janet Napolitano, DENYING 33 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by JS Multi-Trading, Inc., Jiangshan Xiao, 35 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 9/27/2014. (baf, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION JIANGSHAN XIAO & JS MULTITRADING, INC., Plaintiffs, v. RAND BEERS, ACTING SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; DANIEL M. RENAUD, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § Case No. 4:13-cv-107 MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On August 28, 2014, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 32) be GRANTED and that Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 33) be DENIED. The court has made a de novo review of the objections raised by the Plaintiff (Dkt. 37) and is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections are without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. The court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 32) is GRANTED and Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 33) is DENIED. . SIGNED this the 29th day of September, 2014. _______________________________ RICHARD A. SCHELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1

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?