Charles E. Hill & Associates, Inc. v. Abt Electronics, Inc. et al, No. 2:09-cv-00313 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 20, 2010)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

The above-titled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Chad Everingham pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 90), which contains his recommendation that the court deny Abt Electronics, Inc.’s (“Abt”) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (Dkt. No. 48), has been presented for consideration. Abt filed an objection to Judge Everingham’s report and recommendation (Dkt. No. 92). Abt argues that Aschroft v. Iqbal , 129 S. Ct.