Johnson v. Zuckerberg, 2:17-CV-00261-JRG-RSP. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
Number: infdco20171114e84
Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 09, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 09, 2017
Summary: ORDER RODNEY GILSTRAP , District Judge . Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Payne, recommending that Ms. Johnson's claims against all defendants be dismissed with prejudice. See Dkt. No. 30. For dispositive matters referred to a magistrate judge, the district court must "determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C). "The district judge may a
Summary: ORDER RODNEY GILSTRAP , District Judge . Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Payne, recommending that Ms. Johnson's claims against all defendants be dismissed with prejudice. See Dkt. No. 30. For dispositive matters referred to a magistrate judge, the district court must "determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C). "The district judge may ac..
More
ORDER
RODNEY GILSTRAP, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Payne, recommending that Ms. Johnson's claims against all defendants be dismissed with prejudice. See Dkt. No. 30. For dispositive matters referred to a magistrate judge, the district court must "determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). "The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommend disposition." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Upon de novo review of the objected to portions of Judge Payne's findings, conclusions, and recommendation, the Court finds no reason to reject or modify the recommended disposition.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) Ms. Johnson's objections, Dkt. Nos. 31 and 32, are OVERRULED.
(2) The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Dkt. No. 30, is ADOPTED.
(3) Mr. Zuckerberg's motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 24, is GRANTED.
(4) Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel, Dkt. 21, is DENIED.
(5) Plaintiff's claims against all other defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Source: Leagle
