Bishop v. Bostick et al

Filing 69

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 67 Report and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court further ORDERS that the defendant and intervenors motions for summary judgment [Doc. #58 and Doc. #59] are GRANTED and plaintiffs motion for summary judgment [Doc. #53] is DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 9/21/2015. (gsg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
MICHAEL BISHOP
Plaintiff,
v.

THOMAS P. BOSTICK, et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:13-CV-82

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Local Rules for the United States District Court,
Eastern District of Texas, the Court referred this proceeding to United States Magistrate Judge Keith
F. Giblin for pretrial management. On August 31, 2015, Judge Giblin issued his Report and
Recommendation on the parties’ competing motions for summary judgment.

Judge Giblin

recommended that this District Court grant the motions for summary judgment filed by the federal
defendants (the United States Army Corps of Engineers and several officers with the Corps) and the
defendants/intervenors TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, and TransCanada Corporation. He also
recommended that the Court deny the pro se plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and enter
judgment in favor of the defendants and intervenors on all of the plaintiff’s claims.
To date, no party has filed objections to Judge Giblin’s findings and recommendation in
accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

The Court has

conducted a de novo review of the record and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); 28
U.S.C. § 636(b). After careful consideration, the Court accepts Judge Giblin’s recommended

.
disposition. The Court therefore ORDERS that the Report and Recommendation on Motions for
Summary Judgment [Doc. #67] is ADOPTED. Pursuant to the magistrate judge’s recommendation,
the Court further ORDERS that the defendant and intervenors’ motions for summary judgment
[Doc. #58 and Doc. #59] are GRANTED and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment [Doc. #53]
is DENIED. The Court will enter final judgment separately.
SIGNED this 21st day of September, 2015.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2