Abraham v. Clackamas County et al

Filing 51

OPINION & ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation 48 . Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 24 is Granted. Signed on 12/7/17 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION ANDREW ABRAHAM, No. 3:16-CV-01877-PK Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. CORIZON HEALTH, INC., Defendant. MOSMAN,J., On November 14, 2017, Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued his Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [48], reconnnending that Defendant Corizon Health's Motion for Sunnnary Judgment [24] should be granted. No objections were filed. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only reconnnendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the reconnnendations 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 reconnnendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court is 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 objections are addressed. See 1 - OPINION AND ORDER 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)(l)(C). Upon review, I agree with Judge Papak's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [48] as my own opinion. The Motion for Summary Judgment [24] is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this ~y of December, 2017. Chief United States 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?