Filed: Mar. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARCIA A. CRONE , District Judge . This case is assigned to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, for pre-trial management. On February 22, 2019, Judge Hawthorn entered a report (Doc. No. 290) recommending the Court grant Defendants', Ashland Elastomers, LLC and Lion Elastomers, LLC, "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Donning and Doffing Claims" (Doc. Nos. 138, 152) and "Motion for Summary Judgment" (Doc. Nos. 238, 239
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARCIA A. CRONE , District Judge . This case is assigned to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, for pre-trial management. On February 22, 2019, Judge Hawthorn entered a report (Doc. No. 290) recommending the Court grant Defendants', Ashland Elastomers, LLC and Lion Elastomers, LLC, "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Donning and Doffing Claims" (Doc. Nos. 138, 152) and "Motion for Summary Judgment" (Doc. Nos. 238, 239)..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARCIA A. CRONE, District Judge.
This case is assigned to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge, for pre-trial management. On February 22, 2019, Judge Hawthorn entered a report (Doc. No. 290) recommending the Court grant Defendants', Ashland Elastomers, LLC and Lion Elastomers, LLC, "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Donning and Doffing Claims" (Doc. Nos. 138, 152) and "Motion for Summary Judgment" (Doc. Nos. 238, 239), and denying Plaintiffs' "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment." Doc. No. 146.
A party who files timely, written objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is entitled to a de novo determination of those findings or recommendations to which the party specifically objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2)-(3). "Parties filing objections must specifically identify those findings [to which they object]. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court." Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
The court has conducted a de novo review of the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and has carefully considered the Plaintiffs' objections. See Doc. No. 292. The court finds that the magistrate judge's conclusions are correct and the objections are largely a restatement of previously asserted arguments.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiffs' objections (Doc. No. 292) are OVERRULED, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. No. 290) is ADOPTED, and Plaintiffs' "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment" (Doc. No. 146) is DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants', Ashland Elastomers, LLC and Lion Elastomers, LLC, "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Donning and Doffing Claims" (Doc. Nos. 138, 152) and "Motion for Summary Judgment" (Doc. Nos. 238, 239) are GRANTED.
A. final judgment will be entered separately.
