Precision Automation, Inc. v. Technical Services, Inc. et al
Filing
290
ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation (#284). Accordingly, the Court awards Krevanko attorneys' fees and costs in the sum of $129,432.15. Signed on 3/16/10 by Judge Anna J. Brown. (cib)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
PRECISION AUTOMATION, INC., a Washington Corporation, and TIGERSTOP LLC, an Oregon corporation, Plaintiffs, v. TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., an Iowa corporation, Defendant. _________________________________ TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., an Iowa corporation, and DAVID KREVANKO,1 an individual, Counterclaim Plaintiffs, v. PRECISION AUTOMATION, INC., a Washington Corporation, and TIGERSTOP LLC, an Oregon corporation, Counterclaim Defendants. BROWN, Judge.
1
07-CV-707-AC ORDER
2009.
David Krevanko was dismissed as a Defendant on February 9,
1 - ORDER
Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (#284) on February 16, 2010, in which he recommends this Court award David Krevanko $129,432.15 in attorneys' fees and costs. The matter is now before this Court
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 timely filed, this Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. Britt v. Simi Valley
Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983)(rev'd on other grounds). See also Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., 700 F.2d Having reviewed the legal principles
1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983).
de novo, the Court does not find any error.
CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation (#284). Accordingly, the Court awards Krevanko
attorneys' fees and costs in the sum of $129,432.15. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 16th day of March, 2010. /s/ Anna J. Brown
ANNA J. BROWN United States District Judge
2 - 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?