From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

AMR v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
Sep 21, 2011
Civil Action No. 3:10cv787 (E.D. Va. Sep. 21, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:10cv787.

September 21, 2011


ORDER


By Order entered herein on May 16, 2011 (Docket No. 61), pending motions were referred to Magistrate Judge M. Hannah Lauck for report and recommendation.

Having reviewed the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 83) entered herein on August 11, 2011, the plaintiff's objections thereto (Docket No. 84), the defendants' responses to plaintiff's objections (Docket No. 85 and 86), the plaintiff's response to the defendants' response (Docket No. 87), and having considered the record and the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and finding no error therein, it is hereby ORDERED that:

(1) The plaintiff's objections are overruled;

(2) The REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED on the basis of the reasoning of the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION;

(3) ASEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 16) is granted;

(4) The MOTION TO DISMISS (Docket No. 21) filed by the defendant, American Association of University Professors, is granted;

(5) DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO QUASH PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 45(c)(3) (Docket No. 76) is granted;

(6) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR VACATING JUDGMENTS (Docket No. 38) is denied without prejudice;

(7) PLAINTIFF'S FOURTH MOTION FOR AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME (Docket No. 75) is denied without prejudice;

(8) PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION FOR REQUESTING SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM (Docket No. 78) is denied without prejudice;

(9) MOTION TO STAY (Docket No. 14) filed by the defendant, American Society for Engineering Education, is denied as moot;

(10) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR HEARING (Docket No. 40) is denied as moot;

(11) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REQUESTING SUBPOENAS (Docket No. 74) is denied as moot; and

(12) This action is dismissed with prejudice.

The issues are adequately addressed by the briefs and oral argument would not materially aid the decisional process.

This Order may be appealed by the Plaintiff. Any appeal from this decision must be taken by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk of the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of entry hereof. Failure to file a timely notice of appeal may result in the loss of the right to appeal.

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to the plaintiff and to counsel of record.

It is so ORDERED.


Summaries of

AMR v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
Sep 21, 2011
Civil Action No. 3:10cv787 (E.D. Va. Sep. 21, 2011)
Case details for

AMR v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Case Details

Full title:SALAME M. AMR, Plaintiff, v. VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division

Date published: Sep 21, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:10cv787 (E.D. Va. Sep. 21, 2011)

Citing Cases

Amr v. Virginia State Univ.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma…

Amr v. Commonwealth

The allegations in the subsequent cases and this case both involve his employment relationship with VSU and…