Filed: May 14, 2019
Latest Update: May 14, 2019
Summary: ORDER ANN AIKEN , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke filed his Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 42) on March 15, 2019 recommending that plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 23) be GRANTED and defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (docs. 26 and 29) be DENIED. This case is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. Although this relieves me of my obligation to perform a de novo review, I reta
Summary: ORDER ANN AIKEN , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke filed his Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 42) on March 15, 2019 recommending that plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 23) be GRANTED and defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (docs. 26 and 29) be DENIED. This case is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. Although this relieves me of my obligation to perform a de novo review, I retai..
More
ORDER
ANN AIKEN, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke filed his Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 42) on March 15, 2019 recommending that plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 23) be GRANTED and defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (docs. 26 and 29) be DENIED. This case is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
No objections have been timely filed. Although this relieves me of my obligation to perform a de novo review, I retain the obligation to "make an informed, final decision." Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist, 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), overruled on other grounds, United States v. Reyna-Tapia 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Magistrates Act does not specify a standard of review in cases where no objections are filed. Ray v. Astrue, 2012 WL 1598239, *1 (D. Or. May 7, 2012). Following the recommendation of the Rules Advisoiy Committee, I review the F&R for "clear error on the face of the record[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note (1983) (citing Campbell v. United States District Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Vonn 535 U.S. 55, 64 n.6 (2002) (stating that, "[i]n the absence of a clear legislative mandate, the Advisory Committee Notes provide a reliable source of insight into the meaning of a federal rule).
Having reviewed the file of this case and Magistrate Judge Clarke's order, I find no clear error. Thus, I adopt Magistrate Judge Clarke's F&R (doc. 42) in its entirety. Accordingly, for the reasons set for the in the F&R, plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 23) is GRANTED and defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (docs. 26 and 29) are DENIED. The Court declares that Josephine County Ordinance 2017-007 is preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act as it applies to Mercy Flights, Inc.'s ground-leg transport of its critical care air transport services. Josephine County is hereby enjoined from prosecuting plaintiff on the basis of the Ordinance and plaintiffs ground-leg transport conduct within the county.
This case is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
