From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bonneau v. Staton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
May 16, 2012
6:10-cv-1184-TC (D. Or. May. 16, 2012)

Opinion

6:10-cv-1184-TC

05-16-2012

RYAN BONNEAU, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL STATON, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Coffin filed Findings and Recommendation on March 13, 2012, in the above entitled case. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(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 Do u glas Cor p. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).

Plaintiff has time 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 13, 2012, in its entirety. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (#64) is allowed. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (#81) is denied. Plaintiff's motion to strike reply (#139) is denied. This action is dismissed with prejudice. The clerk of court will enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Bonneau v. Staton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
May 16, 2012
6:10-cv-1184-TC (D. Or. May. 16, 2012)
Case details for

Bonneau v. Staton

Case Details

Full title:RYAN BONNEAU, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL STATON, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: May 16, 2012

Citations

6:10-cv-1184-TC (D. Or. May. 16, 2012)