Penguin Group(USA) Inc. v. American Buddha

Filing 84

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Hubels recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R 74 as my own opinion. Signed on 12/6/13 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
PENGUIN GROUP (USA) INC.,
No. 3:13-cv-00497-HU
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
AMERICAN BUDDHA,
Defendant.
MOSMAN, J.,
On September 16, 2013, Magistrate Judge Hubel issued his Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) [74] in the above-captioned case, recommending that Defendant’s
Motion to Change or Transfer Venue [25] be GRANTED. Plaintiff objected [76] and Defendant
responded [79]. I granted Plaintiff leave to submit a reply [82], which was then filed [83].
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
file written objections. I am not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge; instead,
I retain responsibility for making the final determination. I am required to review de novo those
portions of the report or any specified findings or recommendations within it as to which an

1 – OPINION AND ORDER

objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, I am 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 party has objected. 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 I am required to apply to the F&R depends on whether 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).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Hubel’s recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [74]
as my own opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this

6th

day of December, 2013.

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

2 – OPINION AND ORDER