NORTHWEST DIRECT TELESERVICES INC. v. ZWEIZIG, 3:11-CV-910-PK. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Oregon
Number: infdco20120216d73
Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 14, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2012
Summary: ORDER ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#44) on November 18, 2011, in which he recommends this Court deny Plaintiff's Petition (#1) to Modify or Vacate Arbitration Award, grant in part and to deny in part Defendant's Petition (#9) to Vacate in Part and Confirm in Part Arbitration Award, and confirm the arbitration award in its entirety. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil
Summary: ORDER ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#44) on November 18, 2011, in which he recommends this Court deny Plaintiff's Petition (#1) to Modify or Vacate Arbitration Award, grant in part and to deny in part Defendant's Petition (#9) to Vacate in Part and Confirm in Part Arbitration Award, and confirm the arbitration award in its entirety. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil ..
More
ORDER
ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#44) on November 18, 2011, in which he recommends this Court deny Plaintiff's Petition (#1) to Modify or Vacate Arbitration Award, grant in part and to deny in part Defendant's Petition (#9) to Vacate in Part and Confirm in Part Arbitration Award, and confirm the arbitration award in its entirety. 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. Shiny Rock Min. Corp v. U.S., 825 F.2d 216, 218. (9th Cir. 1987). 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 (#44). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Petition (#1) to Modify or Vacate Arbitration Award, DENIES in part Defendant's Petition (#9) to the extent that Defendant seeks to vacate the arbitration award, and GRANTS in part Defendant's Petition to the extent that he seeks confirmation of the arbitration award. Thus, the Court CONFIRMS the arbitration award in its entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
