King v. Baylor University

Filing 55

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 49 Report and Recommendations. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants objections are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED and Plaintiffs First Amend ed Complaint (ECF No. 28) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in accordance with the Report and Recommendation.IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Appointment of Interim ClassCounsel (ECF No. 27) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Alan D Albright. (mc5)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION
ALLISON KING,
Plaintiff,

§
§
§
v.
§
6-20-CV-00504-ADA
§
BAYLOR UNIVERSITY,
§
Defendant.
§
§
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge
Jeffrey C. Mankse. ECF No. 49. The Report recommends that this Court grant Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31), and that Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 28) be
dismissed with prejudice. Because the Report recommends dismissal on the merits, the Report
further recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Interim Class Counsel (ECF No.
27) be denied. The Report and Recommendation was filed on January 1, 2021.
A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and
recommendations of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of
the report and recommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or
general objections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987) (quoting
Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other
grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Plaintiff filed objections on February 11, 2021. ECF No. 50. The Court has conducted a
de novo review of the motion to dismiss and motion to remand, the responses, the report and
recommendation, the objections to the report and recommendation, and the applicable laws.

After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and
recommendation should be adopted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Manske, ECF No. 49, is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s objections are OVERRULED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is
GRANTED and Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 28) is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE in accordance with the Report and Recommendation.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Interim Class
Counsel (ECF No. 27) is DENIED.

SIGNED this 31st day of March, 2021.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE