Castaneda v. Aetna Health Inc et al, No. 1:2007cv00532 - Document 29 (E.D. Tex. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM ORDER adopting 24 report and recommendation. The Ct orders that dft Oscar Enriquez MD's 18 motion for summary judgment is granted; Dft Aetna Health Inc's 19 motion for summary judgment is granted; Pla's 20 motion for dismissal of dfts' motion for summary judgment is denied. Final judgment will be entered separately. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 9/15/09. (bjc, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Castaneda v. Aetna Health Inc et al Doc. 29 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION JAIME E. CASTANEDA, Plain tiff, v. AETNA HEALTH INC. and OSCAR ENRIQUEZ, M.D., De fe n d an ts . § § § § § § § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-CV-532 (TH/KFG) MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Local Rules for the Eastern District of Texas, the Court referred this matter to the Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for determination of pre-trial matters and entry of findings of fact and recommended disposition on dispositive matters. The defendants’ motions for summary judgment and the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the motions for summary judgment are pending before the Court. Judge Giblin entered a Report and Recommendation on the motions for summary judgment on August 12, 2009. He entered findings and recommended that the Court grant the defendants’ motions for summary judgment and deny the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss. He also recommended that plaintiff’s claims be dismissed in their entirety and that the Court enter judgment as a matter of law in favor of the defendants Dockets.Justia.com The plaintiff filed objections to the magistrate judge’s report. See Objections [Clerk’s doc. #27]. Pursuant to the Plaintiff’s objections and in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court conducted a de novo review of the magistrate’s findings, the record, the relevant evidence, the specific objections, and the applicable law in this proceeding. The Court concludes that the plaintiff’s objections are without merit because they do not address any of the magistrate judge’s specific conclusions of law or findings of fact as required by the statute. The plaintiff’s objections also do not present any new arguments or factual issues which were not presented to the Court at the time of summary judgment briefing. After review, the Court finds that Judge Giblin’s findings and recommendations should be accepted. The Plaintiff’s objections are overruled. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation on Motions for Summary Judgment [Clerk’s doc. #24] is ADOPTED by the Court. The factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge are therefore fully incorporated by the undersigned in support of this order. The Court further ORDERS that Defendant Oscar Enriquez, M.D.’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Clerk’s doc. #18] is GRANTED; Defendant Aetna Health Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Clerk’s doc. #19] is GRANTED; Plaintiff’s Motion for Dismissal of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Clerk’s doc. #20] is DENIED. Final judgment will be entered separately. SIGNED this the 15 day of September, 2009. ____________________________ Thad Heartfield United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
