Haber et al v. City of Portland et al

Filing 137

OPINION & ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation 128 . Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment 84 is Granted and Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 85 is Denied. The case is Dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 4/9/21 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gm)

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

JOSEF HABER, an individual, on behalf of
themself and all others similarly situated, et
al.,
Plaintiffs,

No. 3:17-cv-01827-JR

v.
OPINION AND ORDER
CITY OF PORTLAND et al.,
Defendants.
MOSMAN, J.,
On December 4, 2020, Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued her Findings and
Recommendation (F. & R.) [ECF 128]. Judge Russo recommended that I grant Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 84], deny Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment [ECF 85], and dismiss this case. Both Parties filed objections. Upon review, I agree
with Judge Russo and DISMISS this case with prejudice.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
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
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(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
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 Russo’s findings and recommendation, and I ADOPT
the F. & R. [ECF 128] as my own opinion. I GRANT Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment [ECF 84] and DENY Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF 85]. The
case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
DATED this ____ day of April, 2021.

___________________________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER