Cole v. Builders Square

Full title: PAUL COLE, Plaintiff, v. BUILDERS SQUARE, a Delaware corporation, and…

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jan 8, 2001

CV 99-729-ST (D. Or. Jan. 8, 2001)

Opinion

CV 99-729-ST

January 8, 2001

ORDER

OWEN M. PANNER U.S. District Court Judge

Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart filed her Findings and Recommendation on November 9, 2000. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When either 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)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).

Plaintiff has filed timely objections. I have, therefore, given the file of this case a de novo review. I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation. Cuprum's Motion for Summary Judgment (docket $53) is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.