Walker v. University of Texas Medical Branch-Galveston

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 22 granting MOTION to Dismiss - Partial (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified.(agould, 3)

Download PDF
United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION § § Plaintiff. § § vs. § § UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL § BRANCH–GALVESTON, § § Defendant. § August 13, 2018 David J. Bradley, Clerk VICKIE WALKER, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17–CV–00313 ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pending before the Court is the Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison. On June 26, 2018, Defendant UTMB’s Partial Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 22) was referred to Judge Edison for report and recommendation. Dkt. 25. On July 3, 2018, Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation recommending that Defendant UTMB’s Partial Motion to Dismiss be granted, and Plaintiff Vickie Walker’s Title VII retaliation claim be dismissed. No objections have been filed to the Memorandum and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Court reviews the Memorandum and Recommendation for plain error on the face of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). Based on the pleadings, the record and the applicable law, the Court finds that there is no plain error apparent from the face of the record. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: (1) Judge Edison’s Memorandum and Recommendation is APPROVED AND ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; (2) Defendant UTMB’s Partial Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 22) is GRANTED; and (3) Plaintiff Vickie Walker’s Title VII retaliation claim is DISMISSED. It is so ORDERED. SIGNED at Galveston, Texas, this 13th day of August, 2018. ___________________________________ George C. Hanks Jr. 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?