From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davico v. Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 4, 2008
Civ. No. 05-6052-TC (D. Or. Mar. 4, 2008)

Opinion

Civ. No. 05-6052-TC.

March 4, 2008


OPINION AND ORDER


Magistrate Judge Coffin issued his Findings and Recommendation in the above-captioned action on January 23, 2008. Magistrate Judge Coffin recommends that a portion of defendants' bill of costs be disallowed and that it be awarded $6,205.15 in costs. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate judge's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation, objecting to the amount of costs allowed for depositions. Upon review of Magistrate Coffin's findings and recommendation, I find no error.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Coffin's Findings and Recommendation (doc. 133) filed January 23, 2008, is ADOPTED. Defendant's Bill of Costs (doc. 123) is allowed, in part, and costs are taxed against the plaintiff in the amount of $6,205.15.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Davico v. Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 4, 2008
Civ. No. 05-6052-TC (D. Or. Mar. 4, 2008)
Case details for

Davico v. Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals

Case Details

Full title:ALDO DAVICO, JR., Plaintiff, v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Mar 4, 2008

Citations

Civ. No. 05-6052-TC (D. Or. Mar. 4, 2008)

Citing Cases

Davtian v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Or.

Most of the depositions were used at trial. Although four requested depositions were not used at trial,…