Cooper v. Texas Woman's University et al

Filing 67

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE for 35 Report and Recommendations, DEFERRING IN PART 27 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Carine Feyten, Bob Mabry, Abigail Tilton, Lewis Benavides. It is, therefore, ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 27 ) is DEFERRED IN PART. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 12/5/2018. (baf, )

United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION

NANETTE COOPER
v.
LEWIS BENAVIDES, ET AL.

§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-860
(Judge Mazzant/Judge Nowak)

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF 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 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.
On November 13, 2018, the report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #63) was entered containing
proposed findings of fact and recommendations on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiff’s
unconstitutional takings claim and Plaintiff’s claim for the violation of Plaintiff’s procedural due
process rights based on a liberty interest. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge found that the Court
needs narrowly tailored discovery pursuant to Backe v. LeBlanc, 692 F.3d 645 (5th Cir. 2012), and
thus recommended deferring and carrying the issue of qualified immunity as to these claims until
it may be decided, including on summary judgment as appropriate.
Having received the report of the Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto having been
timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge
are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and conclusions of the Court.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #27) is
DEFERRED IN PART.

Specifically, because further factual development is required to

determine whether Defendants’ qualified immunity defense has merit regarding Plaintiff’s claim
for the violation of Plaintiff’s procedural due process rights based on a liberty interest and
Plaintiff’s unconstitutional takings claim, the Court defers resolution of such issue(s) to allow

narrowly tailored discovery, as enumerated in the Report and Recommendation, to uncover only
those facts needed to rule on the immunity claims. The Parties shall have forty-five (45) days from
the date of this Memorandum to conduct the limited discovery/depositions as laid out in the Report
.

and Recommendation and shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of this Memorandum to file
any requests for other discovery not previously listed by the Magistrate Judge as permissible
discovery that they believe will be needed in order to uncover evidence that may be used to
overcome or enforce the defense of qualified immunity.
SIGNED this 5th day of December, 2018.

___________________________________
AMOS L. MAZZANT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2