From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coffelt v. Laphan

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Jan 25, 2022
6:20-cv-00849-AC (D. Or. Jan. 25, 2022)

Opinion

6:20-cv-00849-AC

01-25-2022

DERRICK DEAN COFFELT, Plaintiff, v. SARAH LAPHAN, Defendant.


ORDER

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 26, 2021, in which he recommends that the Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. F&R, ECF 31. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court finds no error.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation [31]. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [15] is granted and this case is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Coffelt v. Laphan

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Jan 25, 2022
6:20-cv-00849-AC (D. Or. Jan. 25, 2022)
Case details for

Coffelt v. Laphan

Case Details

Full title:DERRICK DEAN COFFELT, Plaintiff, v. SARAH LAPHAN, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, District of Oregon

Date published: Jan 25, 2022

Citations

6:20-cv-00849-AC (D. Or. Jan. 25, 2022)

Citing Cases

Powell v. Well Path Care

Because Plaintiff never received a response, he could not proceed to the second step of the grievance…