From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Elkins v. Federal Aviation Administration

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
Jan 4, 2010
Civil No. 08-1073-PK (D. Or. Jan. 4, 2010)

Opinion

Civil No. 08-1073-PK.

January 4, 2010

David J. Elkins, Tampa, Florida, Pro Se Plaintiff.

Kent S. Robinson, Acting United States Attorney, District of Oregon, Kevin Danielson, Assistant United States Attorney, Portland, Oregon, Attorneys for Defendant.


ORDER.


The Honorable Paul Papak, United States Magistrate Judge, filed Findings and Recommendation on November 18, 2009. Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate's Findings and Recommendation concerning a dispositive motion or prisoner petition, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines. Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). This court has, therefore, given de novo review of the rulings of Magistrate Judge Papak.

This court ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Papak dated November 18, 2009 in its entirety.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (#34) is denied. Plaintiff's Motion for In Camera Review (#62) is moot. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (#56) is granted.


Summaries of

Elkins v. Federal Aviation Administration

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
Jan 4, 2010
Civil No. 08-1073-PK (D. Or. Jan. 4, 2010)
Case details for

Elkins v. Federal Aviation Administration

Case Details

Full title:DAVID JOSEPH ELKINS, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division

Date published: Jan 4, 2010

Citations

Civil No. 08-1073-PK (D. Or. Jan. 4, 2010)