Lillis v. Nat'l Credit Union Admin. Bd.

Full title: LOUIS LILLIS and SHIRLEY LILLIS, Plaintiffs, v. NATIONAL CREDIT UNION…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Jan 9, 2015

No. 1:14-cv-867-CL (D. Or. Jan. 9, 2015)

Opinion

No. 1:14-cv-867-CL

01-09-2015

LOUIS LILLIS and SHIRLEY LILLIS, Plaintiffs, v. NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD, Defendant.

PANNER, District Judge

ORDER

:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court makes 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 Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F. 2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).

Here, the parties object to the Report and Recommendation, so I have reviewed this matter de novo. I agree with Magistrate Judge Clarke that Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction should be granted, and that Plaintiffs are not entitled to a stay pending exhaustion of administrative remedies.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#26) is adopted. Defendant's motion to dismiss (#13) is granted and Plaintiffs' request for a stay (#14) is denied. Plaintiffs' motion to settle the record (#30) is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 9 day of January, 2015.

/s/_________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE