Waibel Ranches, LLC et al v. Bureau of Land Management
Filing
163
OPINION & ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Hallman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 149 as my own opinion. Accordingly, I GRANT the United States' Motion to Dismiss 110 . I dismiss Waibel' s first, fifth, and sixth claims with prejudice. I dismiss Waibel's second, third, and fourth claims without prejudice. Signed on 7/14/2022 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dsg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PENDLETON DIVISION
WAIBEL RANCHES, LLC, an Oregon
Limited Liability Company, WAIBEL
PROPERTIES, LLC, an Oregon Limited
Liability Company,
Case No. 2:15-cv-02071-HL
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
MOSMAN,J.,
On April 14, 2022, Magistrate Judge Andrew Hallman issued his Findings and
Recommendation [ECF 149] ("F&R"), recommending that I grant the United States' Motion to
Dismiss [ECF 1101 F&R at 20~21. Plaintiffs Waibel Ranches and Waibel Properties Gointly,
"Waibel") filed timely objections [ECF 155], to which the United States responded [ECF 161].
Without leave to do so, Waibel filed a reply to the United States' response [ECF 162]. Upon
review, I agree with Judge Hallman.
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge
but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to
make a de nova determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
1 - OPINION & ORDER
recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court
is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of
the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121
(9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R
depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject,
or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C).
CONCLUSION
Upon review, I agree with Judge Hallman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R
[ECF 149] as my own opinion. Accordingly, I GRANT the United States' Motion to Dismiss
[ECF 11 OJ. I dismiss Waibel' s first, fifth, and sixth claims with prejudice. I dismiss Waibel' s
second, third, and fourth claims without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 1.i--day of July, 2022.
es District Judge
2 - OPINION & 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?