Pergande v. Trumbo et al

Filing 99

ORDER: Adopting Findings and Recommendation 68 ; Granting in part, denying in part Motion to Dismiss 32 . Signed on 5/21/2012 by U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
EDWARD PERGANDE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
6:10-cv-6314-TC

v.
ORDER
SHERIFF JOHN TRUMBO, et al.,
Defendants.
Magistrate

Judge

Thomas

M.

Coffin

filed

Findings

and

Recommendation on March 6, 2012, in the above entitled case.
The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

§

636(b) (1) (B)

When either party objects to any

portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation, the
district court must make a de novo determination of that portion
of the magistrate judge's report.

See 28 U.S.C.

§

636(b)(1);

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines. Inc.,
1

- ORDER

656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920
(1982) .
Plaintiff has timely filed objections.

I have, therefore,

given de novo review of Magistrate Judge Coffin's rulings.
I find no error.

Accordingly,

I ADOPT Magistrate Judge

Coffin's Findings and Recommendation filed March 6, 2012, in its
entirety.
to

Defendants' motion to dismiss

plaintiff's

plaintiff's

Fourteenth

First

Amendment

Amendment

inadequate law library.

due

claim

based

(#32) is allowed as
process
on

the

claim and
allegedly

Defendants' motion to dismiss is denied

as to plaintiff's First Amendment claim based on the post card
only policy.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this

2

- ORDER

.at

st

day of

-Ui-+-

9

---->/-------'

2012.