Emmert v. Clackamas County

Filing 62

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation 60 , and therefore, Defendant's motion to dismiss 50 is granted in part and denied in part. Further, Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Third A mended Complaint 51 is granted, but Plaintiff is directed to cure the deficiencies described in the Findings & Recommendation before filing that pleading. The Third Amended Complaint shall be filed no later than fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 2/4/2016 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
TERRY W. EMMERT,
Plaintiff,

No. 3:13-cv-01317-ST

v.
CLACKAMAS COUNTY,

ORDER

Defendant.
HERNANDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings & Recommendation (#60) on December 29,
2015, in which she recommends the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendant's motion to
dismiss and grant Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a Third Amended Complaint. 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. .
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation [60], and
therefore,
Defendant's motion to dismiss [50] is granted in part and denied in part as follows: (1)
the motion is granted as to (a) the 142nd Avenue West Properties, Clackamas River Estates,
Clear Creek Estates, and Emmert Heights in the Second Claim; (b) Emmert Heights, the Con
Battin Property, and the Sunnyside Road Property in the Fourth Claim; and (c) the Third and
Fourth Claims for failing to affirmatively plead the discovery of the tortious conduct; and (2) the
motion is otherwise denied;
Further, Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint [51] is granted,
but Plaintiff is directed to cure the deficiencies described in the Findings & Recommendation
before filing that pleading. The Third Amended Complaint shall be filed no later than fourteen
(14) days of the date of this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

day of

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ
United States District Judge
2 - ORDER

, 2016.