From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clow v. Moore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Aug 1, 2012
Case No. 1:12-cv-149-CL (D. Or. Aug. 1, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 1:12-cv-149-CL

08-01-2012

WILSON L. CLOW JR., Plaintiff, v. GRANTS PASS PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER J. MOORE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

PANNER, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. §. 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court makes a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F. 2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).

Here, plaintiff objects to the Report and Recommendation, so I have reviewed this matter de novo. I agree with Magistrate Judge Clarke that the complaint does not state a claim for relief against the Josephine County District Attorney's Office because of absolute prosecutorial immunity. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#51) is adopted. Defendant Josephine County District Attorney's Office's motion to dismiss (#15) is granted with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Clow v. Moore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Aug 1, 2012
Case No. 1:12-cv-149-CL (D. Or. Aug. 1, 2012)
Case details for

Clow v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:WILSON L. CLOW JR., Plaintiff, v. GRANTS PASS PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER J…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Aug 1, 2012

Citations

Case No. 1:12-cv-149-CL (D. Or. Aug. 1, 2012)