Hack v. Wright et al

Filing 124

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - re: Adopting 112 Report and Recommendations. Dft's 67 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [Redacted] is DENIED as to the breach of fiduciary duty claims, and 66 S EALED MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is GRANTED as to the insider trading claims, which are dismissed with prejudice. Additionally, Plaintiff may amend the complaint only to theextent necessary to add 95259 Canada LTEE as a plaintiff. (Signed by Judge Keith P Ellison) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
ROBERT HACK,
Plaintiff,
VS.
THEODORE M. WRIGHT, et al,
Defendants.

September 25, 2020
David J. Bradley, Clerk

§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:14-CV-03442
§
§
§
§

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
(Docs. 66, 67), referred to Magistrate Judge Dena Hanovice Palermo. On July 22, 2020, Judge
Palermo issued a report and Recommendation (“R & R”), recommending as follows: (1) that
Defendants’ motion be DENIED as to the breach of fiduciary duty claims, (2) that Defendants’
motion be GRANTED as to the insider trading claims, and (3) that Plaintiff be given a final
opportunity to amend but narrowly tailored to the extent necessary to add Canada LTEE as a
plaintiff and to further plead his breach of fiduciary duty claims with allegations regarding insider
trading. (Doc. 112.) Defendants filed their objections on August 5, 2020; Plaintiff filed his
response on August 19, 2020; and Defendants filed their reply in support of their objections on
August 26, 2020. (Docs. 115, 118, 120.)
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of the
portions of the R & R to which Defendants have objected. However, the Court agrees with the
conclusions, and the reasoning, of the R & R. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the R & R
in full, except with respect to the opportunity to amend, as Plaintiff stated in briefing and on the
record that he does not intend to further amend the complaint other than with respect to adding

Canada LTEE as a plaintiff. It is accordingly ordered that: (1) Defendants’ motion is DENIED as
to the breach of fiduciary duty claims, and (2) GRANTED as to the insider trading claims, which
are dismissed with prejudice. Additionally, (3) Plaintiff may amend the complaint only to the
extent necessary to add 95259 Canada LTEE as a plaintiff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this the 25th day of September, 2020.

____________________________________
KEITH P. ELLISON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE