Jones et al v. JGC Dallas LLC et al

Filing 107

ORDER ACCEPTING 94 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 9/19/2012) (skt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ERICA JONES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JGC DALLAS LLC, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 3:11-cv-2743-O ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss Defendants’ counterclaims should be granted, and the breach of contract and unjust enrichment counterclaims for set-offs should be dismissed without prejudice. The Magistrate Judge further recommends that Plaintiffs’ motion to strike Defendants’ affirmative defenses should be granted in part, and affirmative defenses numbers 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 33, and 55 should be stricken. Defendants filed objections thereto. The Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection was made. The Court finds that the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge are correct. Accordingly, Defendants’ objections are OVERRULED, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 94) as the findings of the Court. Defendants further ask the Court for leave to amend the aforementioned counterclaims and affirmative defenses. Defendants should present their request, in the first instance, to the Magistrate Judge. SO ORDERED on this 19th day of September, 2012. _____________________________________ Reed O’Connor UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?