McLenithan v. Hill

Filing 57

OPINION AND ORDER: I agree with Judge Sullivan's recommendation and ADOPT the F&R 53 as my own opinion. Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment 51 is DENIED. Signed on 10/11/2017 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (kms)

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

GENE A. McLENITHAN, JR.,
No. 3:07-cv-00761-SU
Petitioner,
OPINION AND ORDER

v.
JEAN HILL,
Respondent.

MOSMAN,J.,
On July 20, 2017, Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan issued her Findings and
Recommendation ("F&R") [53], recommending that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from
Judgment [51] should be DENIED. Petitioner Gene A. McLenithan, Jr. objected [55].

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 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

1 - OPINION AND ORDER

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 scrntiny 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).
I agree with Judge Sullivan's recommendation and ADOPT the F&R [53] as my own
opinion. Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment [51] is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this _jJ_ day of October, 2017.

2 - OPINION AND ORDER