Benton v. John Doe 1 et al

Filing 8

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation 4 . Accordingly, the Complaint 1 is dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time 7 is construed as a motion to allow sufficient time to file an amended complaint and is granted. Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of this Order in which to file an amended complaint. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 5/14/2013 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. Copy of order mailed to plaintiff. (mr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
GREGORY BENTON,
Plaintiff,

No. 03:13-cv-00613-ST

v.
JOHN DOE 1, in his individual and official
capacity; and JOHN DOE 2, in his individual
and official capacity,

ORDER

Defendants.
HERNANDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings and Recommendation (#4) on April 19, 2013,
in which she recommends that this Court dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were
timely filed, I am relieved of my obligation to review the record de novo. United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt,
1 - ORDER

840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate
Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de
novo, I find no error.
In a May 6, 2013 filing, Plaintiff seeks a "30 day extention [sic] of time to fulfill the
findings and recommendation that Magistrate Judge Steward in the order." Mtn for Ex. [dkt #7].
Plaintiff further states that he intends to amend his Complaint and address the issues raised by
Judge Stewart. Although this filing was docketed as a motion for extension of time to file
objections to the Findings & Recommendation, I construe it as a motion to allow sufficient time
for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. So construed, I grant the motion and give Plaintiff
thirty days from the date of this Order to file an amended complaint.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation [4].
Accordingly, the Complaint [1] is dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for extension of time [7] is
construed as a motion to allow sufficient time to file an amended complaint and is granted.
Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of this Order in which to file an amended complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

day of

, 2013.

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ
United States District Judge

2 - ORDER