Williams v. Waste Management Inc et al

Filing 77

Order Accepting 72 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation. The court denies Plaintiff's Expedited Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (Doc. 60 ); and grants in part and denies in part Defendants' Rule 12(c) Motion for Pleadings Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 57 ). Defendants' Rule 12(c) Motion is granted with respect to "all claims against Ramirez, Johnson, and Butler under Title VII, the ADA, the ADEA" and these claims are dismissed with prejudice; and Defendants' Rule 12(c) Motion is denied "to the extent that the original complaint plausibly alleges claims under Section 1981 against Ramirez, Johnson, and Butler." The case is recommitted to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 8/9/2018) (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 8/9/2018) (ndt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
ANDRE W. WILLIAMS, SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§ Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-2943-L (BN)
§
§
§
ORDER

On June 29, 2018, United States Magistrate Judge David L. Horan entered the Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”), recommending
that the court deny Plaintiff’s Expedited Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (Doc.
60), filed June 5, 2018; and grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ Rule 12(c) Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 57), filed May 12, 2018. Regarding Defendants’ Rule 12(c)
Motion, in which Defendants only moved for judgment on the claims asserted against the individual
Defendants, the magistrate judge recommended that the court grant the motion with respect to “all
claims against Ramirez, Johnson, and Butler under Title VII, the ADA, the ADEA” and dismiss with
prejudice these claims; and deny the motion “to the extent that the original complaint plausibly
alleges claims under Section 1981 against Ramirez, Johnson, and Butler.” Report 11. No objections
to the Report were filed.
Having reviewed the motions, pleadings, and Report, the court determines that the findings
and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court.
Accordingly, the court denies Plaintiff’s Expedited Motion for Leave to File First Amended
Complaint (Doc. 60); and grants in part and denies in part Defendants’ Rule 12(c) Motion for
Order – Page 1

Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 57). Defendants’ Rule 12(c) Motion is granted with respect to
“all claims against Ramirez, Johnson, and Butler under Title VII, the ADA, the ADEA” and these
claims are dismissed with prejudice; and Defendants’ Rule 12(c) Motion is denied “to the extent
that the original complaint plausibly alleges claims under Section 1981 against Ramirez, Johnson,
and Butler.” The case is recommitted to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
It is so ordered this 9th day of August, 2018.
_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge

Order – Page 2