From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Aforigho v. Tape Prods. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Jul 30, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-01778 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 30, 2020)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-01778

07-30-2020

LARRY SHEDRACK AFORIGHO, Plaintiff. v. TAPE PRODUCTS COMPANY (TPC), Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On May 4, 2020, Defendant Tape Products Company's Rule 12(b)(5) and Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint; or, In the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion to Dismiss") was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison for report and recommendation. See Dkt. 30. On July 15, 2020, Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 31) recommending that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 27) be DENIED.

No objections have been filed to the Memorandum and Recommendation. 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. The court accepts Judge Edison's Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 31) and adopts it as the opinion of the court.

Accordingly, the court DENIES the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 27).

SIGNED in Houston, Texas, this 30th day of July, 2020.

/s/_________

GEORGE C. HANKS, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Aforigho v. Tape Prods. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Jul 30, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-01778 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 30, 2020)
Case details for

Aforigho v. Tape Prods. Co.

Case Details

Full title:LARRY SHEDRACK AFORIGHO, Plaintiff. v. TAPE PRODUCTS COMPANY (TPC)…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Date published: Jul 30, 2020

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-01778 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 30, 2020)

Citing Cases

Jones v. Lamar Cnty.

(“These cases clarify that Walker applies when a federal court considers state law claims asserted based on…