From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diamand v. Daniels

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Aug 29, 2006
Civil No. 06-37-TC (D. Or. Aug. 29, 2006)

Opinion

Civil No. 06-37-TC.

August 29, 2006


ORDER


Magistrate Judge Coffin filed his Findings and Recommendation on August 3, 2006. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. This relieves me of my obligation to give the factual findings de novo review. Lorin Corp. v. Goto Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1982). See also Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, I adopt Judge Coffin's Findings and Recommendation.


Summaries of

Diamand v. Daniels

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Aug 29, 2006
Civil No. 06-37-TC (D. Or. Aug. 29, 2006)
Case details for

Diamand v. Daniels

Case Details

Full title:DAVID ZEIDEL DIAMAND, Petitioner, v. WARDEN CHARLES DANIELS, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Aug 29, 2006

Citations

Civil No. 06-37-TC (D. Or. Aug. 29, 2006)