Summary
holding "dismissal with prejudice" constitutes "a final decision on the merits and must be given preclusive effect"
Summary of this case from Richards v. Aurora Loan ServicesOpinion
Civil No. 07-732-ST.
May 21, 2008
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart filed her Findings and Recommendation on May 5, 2008. 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. See § 636(b)(1)(C); Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corp., 77 F.3d 1170, 1174-5 (9th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.
Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation #70. Plaintiffs' Motion for Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice Pursuant to Fed R Civ P 41(a)(2) (docket #56) is GRANTED, conditioned on plaintiffs' agreement to dismiss with prejudice and not further prosecute an ORICO claim arising out of the same facts supporting the ORICO claim which this court previously dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.