OIRE Oregon C, LLC v. Yaldo et al

Filing 52

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewart's recommendation 50 , and GRANT plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees 43 and Bill of Costs 47 . Signed on 5/5/09 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

OIRE OREGON C, LLC, No. CV 08-724-ST Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. MAZIN K. YALDO, M.D., and ALEX PUJARI, Defendants.

MOSMAN, J., On March 30, 2009, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") (#50) in the above-captioned case recommending that plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees (#43) and Bill of Costs (#47) be GRANTED. No objections to the F&R were filed. 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 of those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal PAGE 1 OPINION AND ORDER

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 of the magistrate judge's F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewart's recommendation, and GRANT plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees (#43) and Bill of Costs (#47). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 5th day of May, 2009. /s/ Michael W. Mosman MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Court

PAGE 2 OPINION AND ORDER