Bissell v. Mata

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION

TIFFANY BISSELL, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL NO. W-21-CV-00924-ADA § ELAINE MATA, IN HER INDIVIDU- § AL CAPACITY; DANIELLE § CLARIDGE, IN HER INDIVIDUAL § CAPACITY; AND DOES 1-10, §

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Derek T. Gilliland. ECF No. 74. The report recommends Defendants Elaine Mata, Danielle Claridge, Brittany Henway, and Felisha Rodriguez’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57) be GRANTED, Plaintiff Tiffany Bissel’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58) be DENIED, and Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Angela M. Jourdain’s Testimony (ECF No. 62) be DENIED-AS-MOOT. The report and recommendation was filed on June 16, 2025. A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommenda- tions of the magistrate judge within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation, thereby securing de novo review by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). A district court need not consider “[f]rivolous, conclusive, or general ob- jections.” Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987) (quoting Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 410 n.8 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996)). Plaintiff filed objections on June 30, 2025. ECF No. 75. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the motions for summary judgment, the subsequent briefing, the report and recommendation, the objection to the report and recommendation, and the applicable laws. After that thorough review, the Court is persuaded that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation should be adopted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Derek T. Gilliland (ECF No. 74) is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57) is GRANTED, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 58) is DENIED, and Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Angela M. Jourdain’s Testimony (ECF No. 62) is DENIED- AS-MOOT in accordance with the Report and Recommendation. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that this Order shall constitute the final judgment in this case. The Clerk of Court is instructed to CLOSE the case.

SIGNED this 15th day of July, 2024. ‘ C0... Q\ve stan areecet ————}-——— UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG