Herrington v. Bristol et al

Filing 295

OPINION AND ORDER Adopting Findings and Recommendation 264 . Signed on 1/17/20 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. See attached order for details.**2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(James Herrington, Prisoner ID: 4218905) (jy)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

JAMES LEROY HERRINGTON,
Plaintiff,

No. 2:16-cv-00680-AC

V.

OPINION AND ORDER
DR. THOMAS BRISTOL; DR. JODEAN
ELLIOTT-BLAKESLEE; DR. GARTH
GULICK; A. CLEMENTS;
THERAPUTIC LEVEL OF CARE
COMMITTEE; STEVE SHELTON;
MIKE GOWER; SYLVIA WILCOX,
Registered Nurse at SRCI; AMY HUGHES,
Registered Nurse at SRCI; JANE/JOHN
DOE, Members of the Therapeutic Level of
Care Committee; ESTATE OF ELLIOTTBLAKESLEE,
Defendants.

MOSMAN,J.,
On July 29, 2019, Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued his Findings and
Recommendation ("F&R") [ECF 264], recommending that I grant Defendants' Motion for
Summary Judgment [ECF 147], and that I deny Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment
[ECF 86]. Plaintiff filed his objections to the F&R on October 28, 2019, [ECF 288], to which
Defendants responded [ECF 289].

1 - OPINION AND ORDER

LEGAL STANDARD
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 novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
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 of the F&R, I agree with Judge Acosta's reasoning and conclusions.
Therefore, I ADOPT the F&R [264] as my own opinion. I GRANT Defendants' Motion for
Summary Judgment [147] and I DENY Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [86]. As a
result, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

__{Jcray of January, 2020.

United States District Judge

2 - OPINION AND ORDER