Thomas v. Grundfos, CBS et al
Filing
53
ORDER entered ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 42 MOTION to Dismiss Individual Defendants, 46 Memorandum and Recommendations. The individuals defendants are dismissed from this case. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
MICHEL THOMAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
GRUNDFOS, CBS et al.,
Defendants,
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
April 24, 2019
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-18-0557
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
AND ORDER DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge signed on February 15, 2019, and the objections filed by the plaintiff, Michel
Thomas, and made a de novo determination. Rule 72(b), FED. R. CIV. P.; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C);
United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1989). Based on the pleadings, the record, and the
applicable law, the court adopts the Memorandum and Recommendation as this court’s
Memorandum and Order. This court finds and concludes that the motion to dismiss was properly
granted and the claims against Jonathan Hamp-Adams, Thomas Brun Larsen, Paddi Riopelle, Chua
Nguyen, Steve Marshall, Billy Baxter, Lonnie Palla, and Terry Jalufka properly dismissed without
prejudice. The Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to dismiss all claims against defendants
Jonathan Hamp-Adams, Thomas Brun Larsen, Paddi Riopelle, Chua Nguyen, Steve Marshall, Billy
Baxter, Lonnie Palla, and Terry Jalufka based on lack of personal jurisdiction is consistent with and
supported by the applicable legal standards. The defendants’ motion to dismiss, (Docket Entry No.
42), is granted.
SIGNED on April 24, 2019, at Houston, Texas.
______________________________________
Lee H. Rosenthal
Chief 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?