Emmert v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company

Filing 62

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewarts recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R 59 as my own opinion. Defendants amended motion for summary judgment 50 is GRANTED. Signed on 6/7/12 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
TERRY W. EMMERT,
No. 3:11-cv-00003-ST
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
STEWART TITLE GUARANTY
COMPANY,
Defendant.

MOSMAN, J.,
On May 17, 2012, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued her Findings and Recommendation
(“F&R”) [59] in the above-captioned case, recommending that I grant the amended motion for
summary judgment [50] filed by Stewart Title Guaranty Company and joined by third-party
defendant Pacific Northwest Title of Oregon, Inc., and that I dismiss this case with prejudice.
No objections 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 regarding 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
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

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)(1)(C).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewart’s recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [59]
as my own opinion. Defendant’s amended motion for summary judgment [50] is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

7th

day of June, 2012.

/s/ Michael W. Mosman
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
United States District Court

2 – OPINION AND ORDER

.