Opinion
Civil Action 4:20-cv-03200
11-05-2021
DR JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON, et al, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Hon. Charles Eskridge United States District Judge
Plaintiff John Doe brings claims against the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston for discrimination and retaliation under Title IX, for breach of contract, and for First Amendment retaliation. Dkt 2 at ¶¶ 60-72, 77-85. He also brings claims under 42 USC § 1983 against Individual Defendants Margaret McNeese, Sheela Lahoti, Deana Moylan, and Tiffany Obeng. Id. at ¶¶ 73-76.
The Individual Defendants together brought a motion to dismiss, as did UTH. Dkts 29 & 30. These motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Sam Sheldon on March 16, 2021 pursuant to 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Judge Sheldon issued a Memorandum and Recommendation on September 28, 2021, recommending that both motions be granted and the case be dismissed with prejudice. Dkt 44 at 1. Doe did not file objections.
When no party objects to the conclusions of a magistrate judge, the reviewing court need only satisfy itself that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc, 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir 1996); see also FRCP 72(b) Advisory Committee Note (1983).
The Court has reviewed the pleadings, the record, the applicable law, and the recommendation. No. clear error appears.
The motion by Defendants Margaret McNeese, Sheela Lahoti, Deana Moylan, and Tiffany Obeng to dismiss is granted. Dkt 29.
The motion by Defendant University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston to dismiss is granted. Dkt 30.
The case is dismissed with prejudice.
So ordered.