Nesbit v. Progressive Corporation, Inc. et al

Filing 34

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Beckerman's Findings & Recommendation 32 . Accordingly, PUIC's motion for dismissal 24 is granted in part due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Plaintiff is granted thirty days to a mend his complaint to drop any diversity-destroying defendant and properly plead the citizenship of the remaining parties as well as the amount in controversy, and Plaintiff is granted thirty days after he files his amended complaint to perfect service of process on PUIC. Signed on 7/10/2018 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (joha) (Copy Mailed to Plaintiff.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

KEVIN NESBIT,

No. 3:17-cv-01010-SB
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.

PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE CORPORATION
INC.; PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY COMPANY;
PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL INSURANCE
COMPANY; and PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE
CO. INC.
Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued a Findings and Recommendation [32] on
April 24, 2018, in which she recommends that the Court: (1) grant in part PUIC’s motion [24] to
the extent it seeks dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; (2) allow Plaintiff thirty days
to amend his complaint to drop any defendant that destroys diversity and properly allege the

1 – ORDER

citizenship of the parties that remain in his amended complaint; and (3) allow Plaintiff thirty
days after he files his amended complaint to perfect service of process on PUIC.
Because neither party timely filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and
Recommendation, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United
States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v.
Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of
Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal
principles de novo, the Court finds no error.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Beckerman’s Findings & Recommendation [32].
Accordingly, PUIC’s motion for dismissal [24] is granted in part due to lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, Plaintiff is granted thirty days to amend his complaint to drop any diversitydestroying defendant and properly plead the citizenship of the remaining parties as well as the
amount in controversy, and Plaintiff is granted thirty days after he files his amended complaint to
perfect service of process on PUIC.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this

day of

, 2018.

____________________________________
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge

2 – ORDER