Armstrong v. Marathon Petroleum Co.

Full title: MARTIN ARMSTRONG Plaintiff. v. MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY, LP Defendant.

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

Date published: Jun 13, 2018

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-00115 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 13, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-00115

06-13-2018

MARTIN ARMSTRONG Plaintiff. v. MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY, LP Defendant.

George C. Hanks Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Martin Armstrong's Objection to the Memorandum and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and Memorandume [sic] in Support ("Objections"). On March 8, 2018, this case was referred to Judge Andrew M. Edison pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On May 1, 2018, Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation recommending that the Defendant Marathon Petroleum Company, LP's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Marathon's Motion for Summary Judgment") be GRANTED and Defendant Marathon Petroleum Company, LP's Objections to Plaintiff's Evidence Opposing Summary Judgment ("Marathon's Objections to Plaintiff's Evidence Opposing Summary Judgment") be DENIED.

On May 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed his Objections. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [magistrate judge's] report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection [has been] made." After conducting this de novo review, the Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Id.; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).

The Court has carefully considered the Objections; the Memorandum and Recommendation; the pleadings and summary judgment record; and the briefing and arguments of the parties. The Court ACCEPTS Judge Edison's Memorandum and Recommendation and ADOPTS it as the opinion of the Court. It is therefore ORDERED that:

(1) The Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation are OVERRULED;

(2) Marathon's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED;

(3) Marathon's Objections to Plaintiff's Evidence Opposing Summary Judgment is DENIED;

(4) This case is DISMISSED; and

(5) All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

SIGNED at Galveston, Texas, this 13th day of June, 2018.

/s/_________

George C. Hanks Jr.

United States District Judge