Summary
finding that when "Plaintiffs assert that they are not challenging school policies, . . . but rather the individual school employees' failure to execute those policies," summary judgment based on discretionary immunity is not appropriate
Summary of this case from Maney v. BrownOpinion
No. 3:17-cv-01732-SB
11-15-2019
W.S., an individual proceeding under a pseudonym through his guardian ad litem BROOKS COOPER; and K.P., an individual proceeding under a pseudonym through his guardian ad litem BROOKS COOPER, Plaintiffs, v. MOLLALA RIVER SCHOOL DISTRICT, an Oregon Public School District, authorized and chartered by the laws of the State of Oregon, Defendant.
ORDER :
Magistrate Judge Beckerman issued a Findings and Recommendation [63] on September 30, 2019, in which she recommends that the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendant's motion for summary judgment. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court finds no error.
CONCLUSION
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Beckerman's Findings and Recommendation [63]. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment [30] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 15 day of November, 2019.
/s/_________
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge