Rohillco Business Services LLC et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
OPINION AND ORDER - The Court agrees with Judge Beckerman's recommendations and ADOPT the F&R 42 as my own opinion. The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 36 is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs' claim for breach of fiduciary duty is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed on 6/30/2017 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
ROHILLCO BUSINESS SERVICES LLC
and GAP FUNDING COMPANY LLC,
OPINION AND ORDER
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
On June 7, 2017, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) , recommending that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss 
should be GRANTED and Plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty should be DISMISSED
with prejudice. Neither party objected to the F&R.
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
make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
recommendations 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
1 – OPINION AND ORDER
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 with 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).
Upon careful review, I agree with Judge Beckerman’s recommendations and ADOPT the
F&R  as my own opinion. The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss  is GRANTED, and
Plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
day of June, 2017.
/s/ Michael W. Mosman_________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge
2 – OPINION AND ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?