Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00796-CMA-MJW
02-15-2012
RICHARD J. ENRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Defendant.
Judge Christine M. Arguello
ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING JANUARY 6, 2012 REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The above-captioned civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. (Doc. # 6.) On January 6, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 62) on Defendant's "Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion for a More Definite Statement Pursuant to Rule 12(e)" (Doc. # 26). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant Defendant's Motion "such that the Amended Complaint and Jury Demand be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)." (Doc. # 62 at 12.) On January 18, 2012, Plaintiff filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 65), and Defendant filed a Response on February 6, 2012 (Doc. # 67).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this matter, including carefully reviewing all relevant pleadings, the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Objections. Based on this de novo review, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is correct and is not called into question by Plaintiff's Objections.
The only exception to this statement concerns two minor factual errors that do not affect the outcome of this case. First, Plaintiff's defective Complaint in 11-cv-00354 states that he filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC or other appropriate administrative agency on October 6, 2010, not December 6, 2010, as the Magistrate Judge indicated in the Report and Recommendation. (Compare Doc. # 1 at 2 in 11-cv-00354 with Doc. # 62 at 1 in the instant case.) Second, Plaintiff's unsigned Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is at Doc. # 2 in 11-cv-00354, not Doc. # 1 as the Magistrate Judge stated here. (Compare Doc. # 2 in 11-cv-00354 with Doc. # 62 at 2 in this case.)
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 62) filed January 6, 2012, is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court.
2. The objections raised in "Plaintiff's Objections to Recommendation of Magistrate Judge" (Doc. # 65) filed January 18, 2012, are OVERRULED.
3. Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation, Defendant's "Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion for a More Definite State- ment Pursuant to Rule 12(e)" (Doc. # 26) is GRANTED as to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
4. The case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5. Defendant shall have its costs by the filing of a Bill of Costs with the Clerk of the Court within ten days of the entry of judgment. However, each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees.
BY THE COURT:
____________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge