Mendoza v. City of Portland et al
ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation 7 . Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss 3 is Granted. Signed on 1/10/22 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (gm)
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
MARIA MENDOZA, an individual,
THE CITY OF PORTLAND, by and
through PORTLAND POLICE BUREAU, a
municipal corporation, PORTLAND POLICE
OFFICER JOHN DOE 1, in his individual and
official capacity, PORTLAND POLICE
OFFICER JOHN DOE 2, in his individual and
official capacity, and PORTLAND POLICE
OFFICER JANE DOE, in her individual and
HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation on December 2, 2021, in
which she recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss count four of
1 – ORDER
Page 2 of 2
Plaintiff’s complaint. F&R, ECF 7. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation were
timely filed, 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.
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Russo’s Findings and Recommendation .
Accordingly, Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss  is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 10, 2022
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge
2 – 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?