Catibayan v. Sycip Gorres Velayo & CO(SGV)

Filing 59

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation 49 . Accordingly, Defendant's motion to dismiss 11 is granted, and this action is dismissed with prejudice. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 10/7/2013 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

CESAR Y. CATIBAYAN, a U.S.
Citizen
3:13-cv-00273-HU
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
SYCIP GORRES VELAYO & CO. (SGV),
a.k.a. SGV/ERNST & YOUNG (SGV/EY),
a Philippine Accounting firm,
Defendant.
Cesar Y. Catibayan
12705 SE 8th Street
Vancouver, WA 98683
Pro Se Plaintiff
Douglas E. Goe
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
1120 NW Couch St., Ste 200
Portland, OR 97209
Daniel J. Dunne , Jr.
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Ste 5600
Seattle, WA 98104
1 - ORDER

Attorneys for Defendant
HERNANDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel issued a Findings and Recommendation (dkt. #49) on
August 14, 2013, recommending that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (dkt. #11) be granted and
Plaintiff’s action be dismissed for lack of general and specific jurisdiction. Plaintiff filed timely
objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before
me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and
Recommendation, as here, 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); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932
(9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). I
have carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and conclude that his objections do not provide a
basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions
of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation (dkt. #49).
Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (dkt. #11) is granted, and this action is dismissed
with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

day of _______________, 2013.

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ
United States District Judge
2 - ORDER