Estate of Marjory Gail Thomas Osborn-Vincent v. Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc.

Filing 147

OPINION AND ORDER. Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 134 as my own opinion. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss or strike Defendants' counterclaim for attorney fees 96 is DENIED. Plaintiff& #039;s motion to strike Defendants' affirmative defenses 96 is GRANTED in that references to ORS 124.110(1)(b) in paragraphs 51(b)(2) and (4) of the Answer 90 are stricken and is otherwise DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 2/25/2019 by Chief Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pvh)

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

ESTATE OF MARJORY GAIL THOMAS
OSBORN-VINCENT,
Plaintiff,

No. 3:16-cv-02305-YY

v.
OPINION AND ORDER

AMERIPRISE FINANCIAL SERVICES,
INC. et al.,
Defendants.

MOSMAN,J.,
On January 3, 2019, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and
Recommendation (F&R) [134], recommending that I GRANT in part and DENY in part
Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Counterclaim and Strike Defendants' Counterclaim
and Affirmative Defenses [96]. Neither party filed objections 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)(l)(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 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).
CONCLUSION

Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [134] as
my own opinion. Plaintiffs motion to dismiss or strike Defendants' counterclaim for attorney
fees [96] is DENIED. Plaintiffs motion to strike Defendants' affirmative defenses [96] is
GRANTED in that references to ORS 124.1 l0(l)(b) in paragraphs 5l(b)(2) and (4) of the
Answer [90] are stricken and is otherwise DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

2 - OPINION AND ORDER

of February, 2019.