Ruscitti v. Legacy Health

Filing 36

ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation 30 . This Court Grants Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 17 and Dismisses this case with prejudice. Signed on 5/8/24 by Judge Karin J. Immergut. (gm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MELINDA RUSCITTI,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:23-cv-00787-JR
ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS
AND RECOMMENDATION

LEGACY HEALTH,
Defendant.
Caroline Janzen, Janzen Legal Services, LLC, 4550 SW Hall Blvd, Beaverton, OR 97005.
Attorney for Plaintiff.
Dominik Mackinnon, Melissa J. Healy, and Brenda K. Baumgart, Stoel Rives LLP, 760 S.W.
Ninth Ave., Suite 3000, Portland, OR 97205. Attorneys for Defendant.
IMMERGUT, District Judge.
United States Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued her Findings and Recommendation
(“F&R”) in this case on March 18, 2024. ECF 30. Plaintiff Melinda Ruscitti filed Objections to
the F&R, ECF 34, to which Defendant Legacy Health responded, ECF 35. This Court has
reviewed de novo the portions of the F&R to which Plaintiff objected. For the following reasons,
this Court ADOPTS Judge Russo’s F&R.

PAGE 1 – ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

STANDARDS
Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a
de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. But the court is not required to review, de
novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R that are not
objected to. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328
F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not preclude further
review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another standard. Thomas,
474 U.S. at 154.
CONCLUSION
This Court has reviewed de novo the portions of Judge Russo’s F&R to which Plaintiff
objected. Judge Russo’s F&R, ECF 30, is adopted in full. This Court GRANTS Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss, ECF 17, and DISMISSES this case with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 8th day of May, 2024.
/s/ Karin J. Immergut
Karin J. Immergut
United States District Judge

PAGE 2 – ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION