Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

RANDY LEHOUX, Plaintiff v. PRATT WHITNEY, Defendant.

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GEORGE SINGAL, District Judge

The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on February 10, 2006, her Recommended Decision (Docket No. 16). Plaintiff filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 17) on February 17, 2006. Defendant filed its Response to Objection (Docket No. 20) on March 8, 2006.

I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.

1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 16) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED.
2. As the Complaint in this matter was filed outside the applicable statute of limitation, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 9) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Request for Oral Argument (Docket No. 18) is DENIED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LEHOUX v. PRATT WHITNEY
(Mar 9, 2006)