The Inclusive Communities Project Inc v. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
ORDER ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: 8 Motion to Dismiss is granted on the ground of sovereign immunity with respect to Plaintiff's claims for alleged violations of the United States Housing Act, but denied on all other grounds argued. (See Order.) (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 9/29/2009) (twd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
THE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES § PROJECT, INC., § § Plaintiff, § NO. 3:07CV0945O § vs. § § U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING § AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT § § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), t his case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan for pretrial management on October 1, 2008. Doc. # 20. Among the matters then before the Magistrate Judge was a pending Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by Defendant on October 2, 2007, Doc. # 8, together with Plaintiff's Response, and atten dant documents from both parties. See Doc. # # 9, 11 14, 16, 17. On July 20, 2009, Magi strate Judge Kaplan issued his Findings and Recommendations set out in a thorough writ ten opinion. See Doc. # 22. He recommended that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss should be granted on the ground of sovereign immunity with respect to Plaintiff's claims for alleged violations of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437, but denied on all other grounds argued.
The Court now has it before the foregoing documents and records of proceedings, as well as Defendant's Objections to Magistrate Judge Kaplan's Findings and Recommenda tions, Doc. # 33, and Plaintiff's Response, Doc. # 34. After conducting a review de novo, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), of the pleadings, files and records in this case, the Findings and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, and the objections thereto, the Court is of the opinion that the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Magi strate Judge as set out in his opinion are correct. They are accepted as the findings and con clusions of the Court. SO ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2009.
_____________________________________ Reed O'Connor UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?