Aranda v. United States Forest Service, 3:17-cv-02041-JR. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Oregon
Number: infdco20181121f70
Visitors: 11
Filed: Nov. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2018
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERN NDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Papak issued a Findings and Recommendation [16] on September 4, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [13] and dismiss this action with prejudice. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 18. When any part
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERN NDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Papak issued a Findings and Recommendation [16] on September 4, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [13] and dismiss this action with prejudice. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 18. When any party..
More
ORDER
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Papak issued a Findings and Recommendation [16] on September 4, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [13] and dismiss this action with prejudice. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 18. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff's objections and concludes there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation [16]. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [13] is GRANTED. This action is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
