3:25-cv-00661•De Lucena v. Tootsies Entertainment LLC et al
Texto completo
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ORDER Pending before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s Report (Doc. No. 40), recommending that Plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. No. 22) be granted, or in the alternative that Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Doc. Nos. 7, 11, 15, 19) be granted and Plaintiff be allowed to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has no objection to the recommendation to remand. (Doc. No. 41). Defendants filed a response (Doc. No. 42) titled a “partial objection,” but fail to identify an error made by the Magistrate Judge. Thus, their objection is without merit. See Howard v. Sec. of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 509 (6th Cir. 1991) (Objections that do not identify an error are meritless). Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Court concludes that it should be adopted and approved. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 22) is GRANTED, and this matter is REMANDED to the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee. All remaining pending motions are TERMINATED as moot. The Clerk is directed to close the file. It is so ORDERED. ___________________________________ WILLIAM L. CAMPBELL, JR. CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE VINICIUS BATISTA DE LUCENA, Plaintiff, v. TOOTSIES ENTERTAINMENT LLC, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. 3:25-cv-00661 JUDGE CAMPBELL MAGISTRATE JUDGE FRENSLEY Case 3:25-cv-00661 Document 43 Filed 02/18/26 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: <pageID>
Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.