Paulson v. Arbaugh et al

Filing 3

OPINION AND ORDER. Upon review, I agree with Judge Dunns recommendations, and I ADOPT the Reportsand Recommendations [1-16 and 1-17] as my own opinion. Signed on 10/18/12 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION LAUREN PAULSON, No. 3:12-mc-00196-MO Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. MATT ARBAUGH et al., Defendants. MOSMAN, J., On April 26, 2012, United States Bankruptcy Judge Randall L. Dunn issued his Report and Recommendation to the district court recommending [1-16] that I grant defendant Craig Russillo’s motion for summary judgment [1-1] and recommending [1-17] that I grant defendant Matthew Arbaugh’s motion for summary judgment [1-4]. Plaintiff objected [1-20]. Defendants filed a joint response [2]. DISCUSSION Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1), a bankruptcy judge may hear a noncore proceeding that is “related to” a case under title 11. The bankruptcy judge will submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the district court. Id; Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9033(a). A party may file “written objections which identify the specific proposed findings or conclusions objected to and state the grounds for such objection.” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9033(b). An opposing party may 1 – OPINION AND ORDER respond. Id. The district court is generally required to make a de novo determination of those portions of the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1). The district court “may accept, reject, or modify the proposed findings of fact or conclusions of law.” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9033(d). Upon review, I agree with Judge Dunn’s recommendations, and I ADOPT the Reports and Recommendations [1-16 and 1-17] as my own opinion. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 18th day of October, 2012. /s/ Michael W. Mosman MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Judge 2 – OPINION AND ORDER