Opinion
Civil No. 10-CV-403-PK.
November 12, 2010
BARRY J. GOEHLER, Portland, OR, GARY M. BULLOCK, Gary M. Bullock Associates, P.C., Portland, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff.
ANNE M. BREMNER, JAMES T. YAND, DARRIN E. BAILEY, Stafford Frey Cooper, Seattle, WA.
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Papak filed a Findings and Recommendation on September 3, 2010. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When any of the parties object to any portion of the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981),cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).
Defendant has filed timely objections. After de novo review, I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Findings and Recommendation (#23) of Magistrate Judge Papak.
Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (#14) is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 9 day of November, 2010.