Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Air Liquide America Corporation et al

Filing 387

OPINION & ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation 379 . Moving Defendants' Motion to Certify for Immediate Appeal 366 is Denied. Signed on 2/6/20 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS
OF THE YAKAMA NATION,
No. 3:17-cv-00164-JR
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER

V.

AIRGAS USA, LLC, successor in merger to
Air Liquide America Specialty Gases LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, et al.
Defendants.

MOSMAN,J.,
On November 15, 2019, Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued her Findings and
Recommendation ("F&R") [ECF 379], recommending that I deny Moving Defendants' Motion
to Certify for Immediate Appeal [ECF 366]. Moving Defendants filed joint objections
[ECF 3 81]; other Defendants joined those objections [ECF 3 82]; and USA filed a response to the
objections [ECF 383].
LEGAL STANDARD
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 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).
CONCLUSION

Upon review of the F&R, I agree with Judge Russo's reasoning and conclusions.
Therefore, I ADOPT the F&R [379] as my own opinion. I DENY Moving Defendants' Motion
to Certify for Immediate Appeal [366].
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

2 - OPINION AND ORDER

of February, 2020.