From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gross v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Sep 4, 2017
Case No. 1:17 CV 00828-CL (D. Or. Sep. 4, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 1:17 CV 00828-CL

09-04-2017

EDWARD GROSS, Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.


ORDER

Magistrate Judge Clarke filed his Findings and Recommendation on August 9, 2017. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. This relieves me of my obligation to give the factual findings de novo review. Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1982). See also Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, I adopt Judge Clarke's Findings and Recommendation.

Dated this 4 day of September, 2017.

/s/_________

Ann Aiken, United States District Judge


Summaries of

Gross v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Sep 4, 2017
Case No. 1:17 CV 00828-CL (D. Or. Sep. 4, 2017)
Case details for

Gross v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD GROSS, Plaintiff, v. PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Sep 4, 2017

Citations

Case No. 1:17 CV 00828-CL (D. Or. Sep. 4, 2017)

Citing Cases

Garza v. City of Salem

Several courts in this District have held that “LR 3-2 is ‘a mandatory requirement under which a case must be…