Lindsey et al v. Myer et al

Filing 55

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings & Recommendation 53 . Accordingly, the Blackman Defendants' motion to dismiss 25 is granted in part and denied in part and the Municipal and Myers Defendants' mo tion to dismiss 27 is granted in part and denied in part. As a result, plaintiffs' First, Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Claims set forth in plaintiffs' Complaint are dismissed with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 4/2/2012 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (tll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PENDLETON DIVISION
RANDY EUGENE LINDSEY, and RONA
EDITH LINDSEY,
Plaintiff,

No. 2:10-cv-1437-SU

v.
SERGEANT PHILLIP MYER,
et al.,

ORDER

Defendants.
HERNANDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation (#53) on February 13,
2012, in which she recommends that this Court grant the Blackman Defendants' motion to
dismiss in part and deny it in part, and further recommends that this Court grant the Municipal
and Myers Defendants' motion to dismiss in part and deny it in part.
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

1 - ORDER

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 Sullivan's Findings & Recommendation [53].
Accordingly, the Blackman Defendants' motion to dismiss [25] is granted in part and denied in
part and the Municipal and Myers Defendants' motion to dismiss [27] is granted in part and
denied in part. As a result, plaintiffs' First, Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth,
Eleventh, and Twelfth Claims set forth in plaintiffs' Complaint are dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 2nd

day of

April, 2012.

s/Marco A. Hernandez
MARCO A. HERNANDEZ
United States District Judge

2 - ORDER