Wilson v. Decibels of Oregon, Inc. et al

Filing 102

ORDER: Judge Clarke's Findings and Recommendation 97 is adopted. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 72 is granted in part and denied in part; Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 76 is denied. Signed on 10/24/2017 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MATTHEW WILSON, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:16-cv-00855-CL v. ORDER DECIBELS OF OREGON, INC., and DENNIS SNYDER, Defendants. _____________________________ MCSHANE, Judge: Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (ECF No. 97), and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Plaintiff filed objections to the R&R’s recommendation to deny Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion and to grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ summary judgment motion. ECF No. 99. Accordingly, I have reviewed the file of this case de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I conclude the report is correct and adopt. It correctly identifies and details the questions of fact which precludes a court from granting a summary judgment motion. Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion (ECF No. 76) is DENIED and Defendants’ summary judgment motion (ECF No. 72) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 24th day of October, 2017. _____/s/ Michael J. McShane_____ Michael J. McShane United States District Judge 1 – ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?