Odunze v. Lake Effect et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
PROMISE N. ODUNZE,
Plaintiff,
v.
LAKE EFFECT, et al.,
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
DENYING [94] PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case No. 2:24-cv-00341-DBB-CMR
Judge David Barlow
Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero
This matter is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (ECF 4).
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF 32) asserts various claims under Title VII and state law.
Before the court is Plaintiff Promise N. Odunze’s (Plaintiff) Motion for Summary Judgment
(Motion) (ECF 94). In the Motion, Plaintiff seeks summary judgment on his state law claims
against Defendant Celeste Hewlett (Hewlett) (id. at 3). Plaintiff also seeks summary judgment on
his Title VII claims and state law claims against Defendant Lake Effect (Lake Effect) (id.). On
February 6, 2026, the undersigned recommended that the court grant summary judgment to Lake
Effect on Plaintiff’s Title VII claims and therefore decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over Plaintiff’s state law claims (Recommendation) (ECF 145).
RECOMMENDATION
In light of the Recommendation (ECF 145) resolving all of Plaintiff’s claims against
Defendants, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the court DENY Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF 94)
as MOOT.
Case 2:24-cv-00341-DBB Document 149 Filed 02/09/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 2

NOTICE
Copies of the foregoing Report and Recommendation are being sent to all parties who are
hereby notified of their right to object. Within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy,
any party may serve and file written objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Failure to object may constitute a waiver of objections upon subsequent review.
DATED this 9 February 2026.
Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero
United States District Court for the District of Utah
Case 2:24-cv-00341-DBB Document 149 Filed 02/09/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 2