Blocker v. BET et al
Filing
87
OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Acostas recommendation and ADOPT the F&R 83 in full. Defendants BETs and Amazons Motions to Dismiss 61 , 62 are GRANTED, BETs Request for Judicial Notice 70 is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs Amended Complaint 59 is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed on 3/28/2019 by Judge Michael W. Mosman.(Mailed to Pro Se party on 3/28/2019.) (kms)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
TYRONE BLOCKER,
No. 3:17-cv-01406-AC
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
BLACK ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION,
LLC and AMAZON,
Defendants.
MOSMAN, J.,
On March 6, 2019, Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued his Findings and
Recommendation (F&R) [83], recommending that Defendants BET’s and Amazon’s Motions to
Dismiss [61], [62] be granted, BET’s Request for Judicial Notice [70] be GRANTED, and that
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [59] be dismissed with prejudice. No objections were filed.
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
1 – OPINION AND ORDER
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
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).
CONCLUSION
Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta’s recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [83]
in full. Defendants BET’s and Amazon’s Motions to Dismiss [61], [62] are GRANTED, BET’s
Request for Judicial Notice [70] is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [59] is
DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this ____ day of March, 2019.
28th
_______________________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge
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?