From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Merrall v. Norton

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Nov 3, 2005
Civil No. 04-3008-CO (D. Or. Nov. 3, 2005)

Opinion

Civil No. 04-3008-CO.

November 3, 2005


ORDER


Magistrate Judge John P. Cooney filed his Findings and Recommendation on October 11, 2005. 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.

Accordingly, I ADOPT Judge Cooney's Findings and Recommendation. This case is dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court's order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Merrall v. Norton

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Nov 3, 2005
Civil No. 04-3008-CO (D. Or. Nov. 3, 2005)
Case details for

Merrall v. Norton

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD J. MERRALL, Plaintiff, v. GALE NORTON, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Nov 3, 2005

Citations

Civil No. 04-3008-CO (D. Or. Nov. 3, 2005)