Stephens v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

Full title: FRANCIS L. STEPHENS v. BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, INC. U.A.W. LOCAL 218

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division

Date published: Apr 21, 2005

Action No. 4:03-CV-1248-Y (N.D. Tex. Apr. 21, 2005)

Opinion

Action No. 4:03-CV-1248-Y.

April 21, 2005

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

TERRY MEANS, District Judge

Pending before the Court is defendants Bell Helicopter Inc.'s and U.A.W. Local 218's Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. # 23], filed March 16, 2005. Having carefully considered the motion, and noting that the plaintiff wholly failed to file a response,¹ the Court concludes that it should be GRANTED for the reasons stated therein.

1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e) states:

When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of the adverse party's pleading, but the adverse party's response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If the adverse party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the adverse party.

Therefore, it is ORDERED that the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. # 23] is GRANTED.