Makaneole v. SolarWorld Indus. Am., Inc.

Full title: MICHAEL MAKANEOLE, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Jan 17, 2017

3:14-CV-01528-PK (D. Or. Jan. 17, 2017)

Opinion

3:14-CV-01528-PK

01-17-2017

MICHAEL MAKANEOLE, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SOLARWORLD INDUSTRIES AMERICA, INC.; SOLARWORLD INDUSTRIES AMERICA, LP; SOLARWORLD INDUSTRIES SERVICES, LLC; SOLARWORLD POWER PROJECTS, INC., RANDSTAD PROFESSIONALS US, LP, and KELLY SERVICES, INC., Defendants.

BROWN, Judge.

ORDER

BROWN, Judge.

Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#126) on September 2, 2016, in which he recommends the Court grant in part and deny in part the Motion (#79) to Compel Production of Documents of Plaintiff Michael Makaneole; grant in part and deny in part Plaintiff's Motion (#81) to Compel Interrogatory Responses; deny the Motion (#82) for Summary Judgment of Defendants Solarworld Industries America, Inc., Solarworld Industries America, LP, Solarworld Industries Serivces, LLC, and Solarworld Power Projects, Inc (collectively Solarworld); grant the Motion (#84) for Summary Judgment of Defendant Kelly Services, Inc.; grant in part and deny in part the Motion (#86) for Summary Judgment of Defendant Randstad US, LP; grant Kelly's Request (#119) for Judicial Notice; and grant Randstad's Request (#122) for Judicial Notice.

Solarworld, Randstad, and Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9^th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9^th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

The Court has carefully considered the Objections of Solarworld, Randstad, and Plaintiff and concludes they do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court also has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#126). Accordingly, the Court:

1. GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiff's Motion (#79) to Compel Production of Documents;

2. GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiff's Motion (#81) to Compel Interrogatory Responses;

3. DENIES Solarworld's Motion (#82) for Summary Judgment;

4. GRANTS Kelly's Motion (#84) for Summary Judgment;

5. GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Randstad's Motion (#86) for Summary Judgment;

6. GRANTS Kelly's Request (#119) for Judicial Notice; and

7. GRANTS Randstad's Request (#122) for Judicial Notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 17^th day of January, 2017.

/s/_________

ANNA J. BROWN

United States District Judge