Oregon Laborers Employers Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Covington

Filing 27

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation 23 , DENIES as moot Plaintiffs' Motion 9 for Summary Judgment, and DISMISSES Plaintiffs' claims in their entirety. Signed on 01/20/2012 by Judge Anna J. Brown. See attached 3 page Order for full text. (bb)

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

OREGON LABORERS EMPLOYERS
HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST
FUND, OREGON LABORERS
EMPLOYERS PENSION TRUST FUND,
OREGON & SOUTHERN IDAHO
LABORERS-EMPLOYERS TRAINING
TRUST FUND, OREGON LABORERS
EMPLOYERS COOPERATION &
EDUCATION TRUST, PREV AILING
WAGE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST,
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FUND,
and CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
DRUG FREE WORKPLACE PROGRAM
TRUST,

03:11-CV-00026-PK
ORDER

Plaintiffs,
v.
TIMOTHY COVINGTON,
Defendant.

BROWN, Judge.
Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and
1 - ORDER

Recommendation (#23) on October 13, 2011, in which he recommended
the Court dismiss Plaintiffs' claims in their entirety for lack
of subject-matter jurisdiction, deny all pending Motions as moot,
and enter a judgment.

The matter is now before this Court

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate
Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make
a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's
report.

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

See also United States v. Reyna-

Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)(en banc); United
States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988).
In their Objections, Plaintiffs reiterate the arguments
contained in their Supplemental Memorandum Re:
stated at oral argument.

Jurisdiction and

This Court has carefully considered

Plaintiffs' Objections and concludes they do not provide a basis
to modify the Findings and Recommendation.

The Court also has

reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does
not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and
Recommendation.

CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak’s Findings and
Recommendation (#23), DENIES as moot Plaintiffs' Motion (#9) for
2 - ORDER

Summary Judgment, and DISMISSES Plaintiffs' claims in their
entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 20th day of January, 2012.
/s/ Anna J. Brown
ANNA J. BROWN
United States District Judge

3 - ORDER