From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
May 15, 2018
Case No. 1:06-cv-03045-CL (D. Or. May. 15, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 1:06-cv-03045-CL

05-15-2018

MICHAEL MOSS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

:

Magistrate Judge Clarke filed his Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 360) on February 27, 2018. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Because the subject of Judge Clarke's F&R was an unopposed motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement, no objections were filed. Although this relieves me of my obligation to perform a de novo review, I retain the obligation to "make an informed, final determination." Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), overruled on other grounds, United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Magistrates Act does not specify a standard of review in cases where no objections are filed. Ray v. Astrue, 2012 WL 1598239, *1 (D. Or. May 7, 2012). Following the recommendation of the Rules Advisory Committee, I review the F&R for "clear error on the face of the record[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note (1983) (citing Campbell v. United States District Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 64 n.6 (2002) (stating that, "[i]n the absence of a clear legislative mandate, the Advisory Committee Notes provide a reliable source of insight into the meaning of a federal rule). Having reviewed the file of this case, I find no clear error.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that I ADOPT Judge Clarke's F&R (doc. 360). The Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and Related Relief (doc. 358) is GRANTED. Class counsel is hereby directed to contact Courtroom Deputy Cathy Kramer at Cathy_Kramer@ord.uscourts.gov or (541) 431-4102 to set a date for a fairness hearing. Class counsel shall then proceed with the notice plan as outlined in the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement.

Dated this 15 day of May 2018.

/s/_________

Ann Aiken

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
May 15, 2018
Case No. 1:06-cv-03045-CL (D. Or. May. 15, 2018)
Case details for

Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv.

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL MOSS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: May 15, 2018

Citations

Case No. 1:06-cv-03045-CL (D. Or. May. 15, 2018)