From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edwards v. Mcdermott Int'l

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Sep 29, 2023
Civil Action 4:18-CV-04330 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 29, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 4:18-CV-04330

09-29-2023

MIRIAM EDWARDS, et al., Plaintiffs. v. MCDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants.


ORDER REJECTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

GEORGE C. HANKS, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On October 19, 2021, all pretrial matters in this case were referred to United States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Dkt. 204. Judge Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation on September 11, 2023, recommending that the Section 14(a) Lead Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Class Certification, Appointment of Class Representatives, and Appointment of Class Counsel (Dkt. 303) be denied. Dkt. 387. On September 25, 2023, Plaintiff filed its Objections to Judge Edison's Memorandum and Recommendation. Dkt. 403.

Under 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 district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”).

Having carefully considered the Objections, the Memorandum and Recommendation, the pleadings, and the record, the Court REJECTS Judge Edison's Memorandum and Recommendation. Section 14(a) Lead Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Class Certification, Appointment of Class Representatives, and Appointment of Class Counsel (Dkt. 303) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to being reasserted with briefing that focuses solely on the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and the predominance and superiority requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). The parties are ORDERED to submit an agreed briefing schedule on or before October 6, 2023.

It is so ORDERED.


Summaries of

Edwards v. Mcdermott Int'l

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Sep 29, 2023
Civil Action 4:18-CV-04330 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 29, 2023)
Case details for

Edwards v. Mcdermott Int'l

Case Details

Full title:MIRIAM EDWARDS, et al., Plaintiffs. v. MCDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., et…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Date published: Sep 29, 2023

Citations

Civil Action 4:18-CV-04330 (S.D. Tex. Sep. 29, 2023)