Summary
holding that while the defendant's "Umbrella Plan and the Disability Program f[e]ll squarely within ERISA" the "appropriate focus of the [payroll practice exemption] analysis is the particular benefit at issue."
Summary of this case from Mostajo v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.Opinion
No. 2:12-cv-2027 JAM KJN PS
12-13-2012
JEROME CLAY, Plaintiff, v. AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER
On November 19, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (dkt. no. 24) which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No objections were filed.
Accordingly, the court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).
The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations (dkt. no. 24) are ADOPTED; and
2. Plaintiff's motion to remand the action to state court, and for an award of attorneys' fees and costs, is DENIED.
John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE