Madsen v. Harris

Filing 79

ORDER: Denying Motion for Summary Judgment 73 ; Adopting Findings and Recommendation 75 . See formal Order. Signed on 9/30/2019 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (Mailed to Pro Se party on 10/1/2019.) (rdr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
EUGENE DIVISION

Case No. 1:16-cv-02170-MK

JEFF MADSEN,

ORDER
Plaintiff,
V.

JOHN HARRIS doing business as
Business Partner Services,
Defendant.
AIKEN, District Judge:
Magistrate

Judge

Mustafa

Kasubhai

has

filed

his

Findings

and

Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 75) recommending that plaintiffs' Motion for
Summary Judgment (doc. 73) be denied. This case is now before me. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(l)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's F&R, the
district court must make a de nova determination of that portion of the magistrate
judge's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore
Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert denied, 455 U.S.

Page 1 - ORDER

920 (1982). Plaintiff has filed timely objections (doc. 77) to the F&R. Defendant has
filed not response. Thus, this Court reviews the F&R de nova.
Having reviewed the objections as well as the entire file of this case, the
Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Kasubhai's F&R. Thus, the Court adopts
the F&R (doc. 75) in its entirely.

Accordingly, plaintiffs Motion for Summary

Judgment (doc. 73) is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED.
Dated this 30th day of September, 2019.

Ann Aiken
United States District Judge

Page 2 - ORDER