Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Armstrong v. Saul, 3:19-CV-00137. (2020)

Court: District Court, S.D. Texas Number: infdco20200212c84 Visitors: 22
Filed: Feb. 11, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 11, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION JEFFREY V. BROWN , District Judge . On August 13, 2019, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). Dkt. 10. On January 21, 2020, Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 16) recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 13) be DENIED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 14) be GRANTED. No objections to the Me
More

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On August 13, 2019, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Dkt. 10. On January 21, 2020, Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 16) recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 13) be DENIED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 14) be GRANTED.

No objections to the Memorandum and Recommendation have been filed. Accordingly, the Court reviews the Memorandum and Recommendation for plain error on the face of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).

Based on the pleadings, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that there is no plain error apparent from the face of the record. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:

(1) Judge Edison's Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 16) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court; (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 13) is DENIED; and (3) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 14) is GRANTED.

It is so ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer