WRIGHT v. ATECH LOGISTICS, INC.

Filing 19

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 17 . I GRANT Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 7 . Plaintiff's first and second claims for relief, as well as his related declaratory judgment claims, are DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 7/30/2020 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gw)

Case 3:20-cv-00469-SB

Document 19

Filed 07/30/20

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ALEX WRIGHT, both on behalf of himself
individually and, in addition, on behalf of the
other similarly situated employees,

Case No. 3:20-cv-00469-SB
OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff,
v.
ATECH LOGISTICS, INC., a California
corporation,

Defendant.

MOSMAN, J.,
On July 9, 2020, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) [ECF 17], recommending that this court GRANT Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss [ECF 7] and dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff’s first and second claims for
relief and his declaratory judgment claims, as they relate to the dismissed claims. No response
was filed. Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman, and I GRANT the Motion to Dismiss.
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

1 – OPINION AND ORDER

Case 3:20-cv-00469-SB

Document 19

Filed 07/30/20

Page 2 of 2

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 Beckerman’s recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R
[17]. I GRANT Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [7]. Plaintiff’s first and second claims for relief,
as well as his related declaratory judgment claims, are DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 30th day of July, 2020.
____________________________
.
M/chaet wMosmaM
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER