Alkemade et al v. Quanta Indemnity Co. et al

Filing 54

ORDER: Adopting Judge Coffin's Findings and Recommendation 46 ; Denying Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 31 ; Denying Motion pursuant to Rule 56(d) to Preclude Summary Judgment 39 ; Denying Motion for Summary Judgment 22 and Denying Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 24 ). Signed on 4/10/2013 by Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken. (lg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
ADRIANUS ALKEMADE and
RACHELLE ALKEMADE,

0 R D E R

No. 6:12-cv-844-TC

Plaintiffs,
vs.
QUANTA INDEMNITY CO., a
Colorado domiciled insurance
company, and GENERAL FIDELITY
INSURANCE CO., a South Carolina
domiciled insurance company,
Defendants.
AIKEN, Chief Judge:
Magistrate Judge Coffin filed his Findings and
Recommendation on January 8, 2013.
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§

The matter is now before me

636(b) (1) (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

When a party objects to any portion of the Magistrate's

1- ORDER

Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de
novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate's report.
28 U.S.C.

§

636(b) (1) (B); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore

Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert.
denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).
Defendants have separately filed timely objections

(#50

and #51), plaintiffs filed an Combined Opposition to those
Objections, and defendants declined to file any reply briefs.
I have, therefore, given the file of this case a de novo
review.

I ADOPT the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation

(doc. 46) as follows: the cross-motion for summary judgment
(#31), motion for summary judgment (#22), Motion pursuant to
Rule 56(d) to Preclude Summary Judgment (#39), and motion for
partial summary judgment (#24) are denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this

/0 day

of April 2013.

Ann Aiken
United States District Judge

2- ORDER