McQueen/Tornblad v. State of Oregon et al

Filing 8

ORDER: Upon careful review, I agree with Judge Jelderks's recommendations and I ADOPT the F&R 5 as my own. The action should be DISMISSED without service of process for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The action is dismissed with prejudice as to the State of Oregon and without prejudice as to the remaining defendants. Signed on 10/17/2016 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (jtj)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

JESSICA SUE MCQUEEN TORNBLAD,
No. 3:16-cv-01470-JE
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
STATE OF OREGON, et al.,
Defendants.
MOSMAN, J.,
On September 13, 2016, Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued his Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) [5], recommending that Plaintiff’s action should be DISMISSED
without service of process for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff
failed to object to the F&R.
DISCUSSION
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
recommendation 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 conclusions of

1 – OPINION AND ORDER

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 under 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 Jelderks’s recommendations and I ADOPT the
F&R [5] as my own. The action should be DISMISSED without service of process for failure to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The action is dismissed with prejudice as to the
State of Oregon and without prejudice as to the remaining defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
17
DATED this _______ day of October, 2016.

/s/ Michael W. Mosman
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER