Wantou v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
MEMORANDUM ORDER, Granting in Part 49 Amended Rule 12(b)(6) MOTION to Dismiss Defendant Wal-Mart Stores Texas filed by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. hereby ORDERING that Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation and/or discrimination claims based upon an alleged failure to promote are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.. Signed by District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 3/12/2018. (sm, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WAL-MART STORES TEXAS, LLC
The above-entitled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Report of the Magistrate
Judge which contains her proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such
action has been presented for consideration.
On February 15, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation,
recommending Defendant Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC’s First Amended Rule 12(b)(6) Motion
to Dismiss (Docket No. 49) be granted in part. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended
Plaintiff’s Title VII retaliation and/or discrimination claims based upon an alleged failure to promote
be dismissed with prejudice. Otherwise, the Magistrate Judge recommended Defendant’s partial
motion be denied.1
To date, no objections have been filed to the February 15, 2018 Report and Recommendation.
As noted in the Report and Recommendation, failure to file objections to the proposed findings and
In addition to other claims not addressed by Defendant’s current motion to dismiss (i.e.
disparate treatment and hostile work environment claims), Plaintiff alleges a claim of retaliation
pursuant to Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 based upon certain alleged adverse employment actions
that included failures to promote and Plaintiff’s termination from employment. Defendant only
moves to dismiss those discrimination and retaliation claims asserted by Plaintiff under Title VII that
are based upon the alleged failures to promote.
Regarding Plaintiff’s race, color, ethnicity, and national origin claims asserted under § 1981,
Defendant moves to dismiss only those based upon color, ethnicity, and national origin.
recommendations contained in the report within fourteen days of service bars an aggrieved party
from de novo review by the district court of those proposed findings and recommendations and
from appellate review of factual findings accepted or adopted by the district court, except on
grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), (3).
There being no grounds of plain error or manifest injustice, the Court hereby adopts the
Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC’s First Amended Rule 12(b)(6)
Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 49) is GRANTED IN PART. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Title VII retaliation and/or discrimination claims based upon
an alleged failure to promote are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Any other relief sought in Defendant’s motion is DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12th day of March, 2018.
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 2 of 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?