Garbarino v. Christie School

Full title: EMILY A. GARBARINO, Plaintiff, v. THE CHRISTIE SCHOOL, a non-profit…

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Oct 31, 2007

Civil Case No. 06-1630-PK (D. Or. Oct. 31, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 06-1630-PK.

October 31, 2007

Glenn Solomon, Portland, Oregon, Attorney for Plaintiff.

Scott Oborne, Mark Crabtree, Jackson Lewis LLP, Portland, Oregon, Attorneys for Defendant.

ORDER

GARR KING, District Judge

The Honorable Paul Papak, United States Magistrate Judge, filed Findings and Recommendation on September 26, 2007. The matter is before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Plaintiff has filed objections and defendant has filed a response.

When either party objects 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).

Having given a de novo review of the issues raised in the objections to the Findings and Recommendation, I find no error.

Accordingly, I ADOPT Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#43) and GRANT defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (#11).

IT SO ORDERED.