Gonzalez v. Davis, 6:18cv574. (2020)
Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
Number: infdco20200306g97
Visitors: 13
Filed: Mar. 04, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 04, 2020
Summary: ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL THAD HEARTFIELD , District Judge . The above-styled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration, and no objections thereto having been timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magist
Summary: ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL THAD HEARTFIELD , District Judge . The above-styled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration, and no objections thereto having been timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistr..
More
ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL
THAD HEARTFIELD, District Judge.
The above-styled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration, and no objections thereto having been timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and adopts same as the findings and conclusions of the court. It is accordingly
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by the Defendants Davis and Navarette (docket no. 21) is GRANTED. The claims against these Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. It is further
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by the Defendants Pace and Willingham (docket no. 20) is DENIED. The Defendants Pace and Willingham shall have 14 days from the date of entry of this order in which to answer the lawsuit or otherwise plead as appropriate. The deadlines set out in the scheduling order previously entered (docket no. 16) shall go into effect upon the filing of the answer. Finally, it is
ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion to stay and for appointment of counsel (docket no. 31) is DENIED at this time, subject to reconsideration in the event it later appears that a stay of the case or appointment of counsel is appropriate.
Source: Leagle