Zelpro Assembly Solutions, LLC et al v. Stingl Products, LLC et al

Filing 87

OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment is therefore GRANTED for the reasons outlined in Judge Stewarts F&R. Signed on 12/18/12 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

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

ZELPRO ASSEMBLY SOLUTIONS, LLC,
et al.,
No. 3:11-cv-00519-ST
Plaintiffs,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
STINGL PRODUCTS, LLC, et al.,
Defendants,
NAC GROUP, INC.,
Defendant-Intervenor.
MOSMAN, J.,
On October 10, 2012, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued her Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) [83] in the above-captioned case, recommending that I grant
plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment [63]. Defendants filed objections [85], and
plaintiffs filed a response [86]. Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewart’s recommendation, and
I ADOPT the F&R as my own opinion.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
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
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

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
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).
CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment is therefore GRANTED for the reasons
outlined in Judge Stewart’s F&R.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 18th

day of December, 2012.

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

2 – OPINION AND ORDER