Vaughn v. Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC, Civil Action 18-0282-KD-MU. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20180830933
Visitors: 2
Filed: Aug. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 29, 2018
Summary: ORDER KRISTI K. DuBOSE , Chief District Judge . This action is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC (doc. 4). Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff Kourtney Vaughn's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Although given an opportunity to do so (doc. 9), Plaintiff did not respond to the Motion and did not file an amended complaint. The Magistrate Judge entered a Report and R
Summary: ORDER KRISTI K. DuBOSE , Chief District Judge . This action is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC (doc. 4). Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff Kourtney Vaughn's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Although given an opportunity to do so (doc. 9), Plaintiff did not respond to the Motion and did not file an amended complaint. The Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Re..
More
ORDER
KRISTI K. DuBOSE, Chief District Judge.
This action is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC (doc. 4). Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff Kourtney Vaughn's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Although given an opportunity to do so (doc. 9), Plaintiff did not respond to the Motion and did not file an amended complaint. The Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation that this action should be dismissed (doc. 13).
After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issue raised, and no objections having been filed by Plaintiff, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED.
Source: Leagle
