ORDER

ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.

Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#41) on October 19, 2010, in which he recommends this Court construe Plaintiff's Motion (#30) for Discovery and/or Inspection to Allow Depositions as a response to Defendant's Motion for Protective Order, grant Defendant's Motion (#19) for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff's Claims and Defendant's declaratory relief Counterclaims, deny Defendant's Motion (#19) for Summary Judgment as to Defendant's Fourth Counterclaim for attorneys' fees and costs, grant Plaintiff's Cross-Motion (#28) for Summary Judgment only as to Defendant's Fourth Counterclaim for attorneys' fees, deny Plaintiff's Cross-Motion (#28) for Summary Judgment as to all of Plaintiff's other Claims and Counterclaims, deny as moot Defendant's Motion (#22) for Protective Order, and enter Judgment dismissing this matter with prejudice. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, this Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). See also Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court does not find any error.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#41). Accordingly, the Court:

IT IS SO ORDERED.