Does 1-5 v. Obiano

Filing 37

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Judge Edisons Memorandum and Recommendation Dkt. 34 is APPROVED AND ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; Defendants Opposed Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint Dkt. 21 is GRANTED; and Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration Dkt. 35 is DENIED AS MOOT. (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified. (ByronThomas, 4)

Download PDF
United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION JANE DOES 1–5, Plaintiffs. V. WILLIE OBIANO, Defendant. February 05, 2024 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk § § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:23-CV-00813 § § § § ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION On October 31, 2023, all pretrial matters in this case were referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Dkt. 31. Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation on January 17, 2024, recommending that Defendant’s Opposed Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Dkt. 21) be GRANTED. Dkt. 34. On January 23, 2024, Plaintiffs Jane Does 1–5 filed their Objections. Dkt. 36. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [magistrate judge’s] report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection [has been] made.” After conducting this de novo review, the Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id.; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). The Court has carefully considered the Objections; the Memorandum and Recommendation; the pleadings; and the record. The Court ACCEPTS Judge Edison’s Memorandum and Recommendation and ADOPTS it as the opinion of the Court. It is therefore ORDERED that: (1) Judge Edison’s Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 34) is APPROVED AND ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; (2) Defendant’s Opposed Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Dkt. 21) is GRANTED; and (3) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 35) is DENIED AS MOOT. It is so ORDERED. SIGNED at Houston, Texas on February 5, 2024. ________________________ 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?