ASAKE v. MOYNIHAN, 15-CV-2110 (PJS/FLN). (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Minnesota
Number: infdco20151113915
Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER PATRICK J. SCHILTZ , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' objection to the October 9, 2015 Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel. Plaintiffs have also filed in a letter in which they contend that Judge Noel and the defense attorneys should be held in contempt. See ECF No. 32. In the R&R, Judge Noel recommends granting defendants' motions to dismiss and denying plaintiffs' motion to deny defendants' motion to dismiss. The Co
Summary: ORDER PATRICK J. SCHILTZ , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' objection to the October 9, 2015 Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel. Plaintiffs have also filed in a letter in which they contend that Judge Noel and the defense attorneys should be held in contempt. See ECF No. 32. In the R&R, Judge Noel recommends granting defendants' motions to dismiss and denying plaintiffs' motion to deny defendants' motion to dismiss. The Cou..
More
ORDER
PATRICK J. SCHILTZ, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' objection to the October 9, 2015 Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel. Plaintiffs have also filed in a letter in which they contend that Judge Noel and the defense attorneys should be held in contempt. See ECF No. 32. In the R&R, Judge Noel recommends granting defendants' motions to dismiss and denying plaintiffs' motion to deny defendants' motion to dismiss. The Court has conducted a de novo review. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Based on that review, the Court overrules plaintiffs' objection and adopts Judge Noel's R&R. Further, plaintiffs' argument that Judge Noel and the defense attorneys should be held in contempt is baseless.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, the Court OVERRULES plaintiffs' objection [ECF No. 27] and ADOPTS the R&R [ECF No. 26]. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Defendants' motions to dismiss [ECF Nos. 5, 13] are GRANTED.
2. Plaintiffs' motion to deny defendants' motions to dismiss [ECF No. 21] is DENIED.
3. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND ON THE MERITS. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
Source: Leagle
