JOHNSON v. CITY OF NASHVILLE A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 4:11-cv-4033. (2012)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20120201732
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jan. 31, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2012
Summary: ORDER SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed January 12, 2012, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 40). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 14) be denied as moot in light of the Second Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 30) that was filed by Plaintiffs subsequent to the motion to dism
Summary: ORDER SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed January 12, 2012, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 40). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 14) be denied as moot in light of the Second Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 30) that was filed by Plaintiffs subsequent to the motion to dismi..
More
ORDER
SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed January 12, 2012, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 40). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 14) be denied as moot in light of the Second Amended and Substituted Complaint (ECF No. 30) that was filed by Plaintiffs subsequent to the motion to dismiss. The parties have not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to object has passed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in toto. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
