Miller v. City of Portland, 3:12-cv-1222-AC. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Oregon
Number: infdco20180622820
Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 07, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 07, 2018
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERNANDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation (#67) on April 27, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant in party and deny in part Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees. The matter is now before me 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, I am relieved of my obligation to review the recor
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERNANDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation (#67) on April 27, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant in party and deny in part Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees. The matter is now before me 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, I am relieved of my obligation to review the record..
More
ORDER
MARCO A. HERNANDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation (#67) on April 27, 2018, in which he recommends that this Court grant in party and deny in part Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees. The matter is now before me 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, I am relieved of my obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings & Recommendation [67]. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees [40] is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is awarded $6,000 in attorney's fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
