Seal Source, Inc. v. Calderson et al

Filing 102

ORDER. The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation 100 in this action is ADOPTED. Accordingly, defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 75 is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part as follows: summary judgment is denied o n plaintiff's claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, misappropriation of trade secrets, and intentional interference with economic relations, and summary judgment is granted on plaintiff's claim of conversion. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Reply 90 and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Declaration of Roger Hennigan 92 are DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 10/24/2011 by Judge Malcolm F. Marsh. (pvh)

FIlED24 OCT '11 B39USDC'ORP

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
THE DISTRICT

~OR

O~

OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION
SEAL SOURCE, INC.,

Case No. 3:09-cv-875-HU

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.

CESAR CALDERON,
Defendant.
MARSH, Judge
Magistrate

Dennis

J.

Hubel

issued

Recommendation (lFlOO) on September 29, 2011.
recommended that

Defendant's Motion

for

a

~indings

The Magistrate Judge

Summary Judgment

should be granted in part and denied in part.

and

(117 5)

Specifically, Judge

Hubel recommended that summary judgment be denied on plaintiff's
claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, misappropriation of
trade

secrets,

relations,

and

intentional

with

economic

and that summary judgment be granted to defendant on

plaintiff's claim of conversion.
plaintiff's

interference

Motion

to

Strike

Judge Hubel also recommended that
defendant's

reply

(#90),

and

plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Declaration of Roger Hennigan
(l~92)

of should be denied as moot.

pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

1 - ORDER

§

636(b) (1) (B)

The matter is now before me
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.
Tapia,

328

F.3d 1114,

1121

(9th Cir.

United States v. Reyna2003) (en banc);

United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444
Having reviewed the legal principles de novo,

see also

(9th Cir. 1988).

the court does not

find any error.
CONCLUSION

The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation (#100) in
this

action

is

Summary Judgment
follows:
the

ADOPTED.
(Jt75)

Accordingly,

defendant's

Motion

for

is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part as

summary judgment is denied on plaintiff's claims under

Computer

Fraud

and

Abuse

Act,

misappropriation

of

trade

secrets, and intentional interference with economic relations, and
summary judgment is granted on plaintiff's claim of conversion.
Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Reply (#90) and Plaintiff's Motion
to Strike the Declaration of Roger Hennigan (#92) are

DENIED as

moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

~7I day of OCTOBER,

2011.

Malcolm F. Marsh
United States District Judge

2 - ORDER