Opinion
No. 3:16-cv-01562-JE
01-12-2017
BRANDON MOYE, SR., Plaintiff, v. ESCO CORPORATION, an Oregon Corporation; and WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD, Defendants.
ORDER :
Magistrate Judge Jelderks issued a Findings and Recommendation [35] on November 17, 2016, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [8], deny Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [25] as moot, and deny Defendant's request for sanctions. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation. ECF 40. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
The Court carefully considered Plaintiff's objections and concludes there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no other errors in the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Jelderks' Findings & Recommendation [35]. The Court grants Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [8], denies Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [25] as moot, and denies Defendant's request for sanctions. Accordingly, this case is dismissed with prejudice.
As Judge Jelderks noted, while Plaintiff names "Workers Compensation Board" in the caption of the case, ESCO is the only defendant listed in the Complaint itself. Plaintiff does not object to Judge Jelderks' determination that granting summary judgment to ESCO disposes of this case. --------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 12 day of Jan u a r y, 2017.
/s/_________
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge