Anderson et. al v. Multnomah County

Filing 94

OPINION AND ORDER: Upon de novo review, the Court ADOPTS without modification the F&R (ECF 80 ) in full. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54 ) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 1/27/2025 by Judge Amy M. Baggio. (pvh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON GREGORY H. ANDERSON, an individual, and YU TE, an individual, Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 3:20-cv-00555-YY ORDER MULTNOMAH COUNTY, Defendant. BAGGIO, District Judge: On October 4, 2024, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”) (ECF 80), that recommended GRANTING Defendant Multnomah County’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54) on the First Amendment retaliation claims asserted by Plaintiff’s Gregory H. Anderson and Yu Te (collectively “Plaintiffs”). 1 The Court has reviewed de novo the portions Judge You’s F&R to which Plaintiffs’ objected (ECF 92) and adopts without modification her recommendation. This Court previously dismissed all claims other than the First Amendment retaliation claims asserted by Anderson and Te. July 6, 2022, Order (ECF 40). 1 1 – OPINION AND ORDER II. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B), (C). If a party objects, the court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendation to which objection is made.” Id. § 636(b)(1)(C). The court is not, however, 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. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Ramos, 65 F.4th 427, 433 (9th Cir. 2023). While the level of scrutiny that the court applies to its F&R review depends on whether a party has filed objections, the court is free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. Upon de novo review, the Court ADOPTS without modification the F&R (ECF 80) in full. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 54) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. 27thday of January 2025. DATED this ____ _______________________ AMY M. BAGGIO 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?