Opinion
Civil No. 04-1668-ST.
November 21, 2005
Michael J. Slominski, Terrance J. Slominski, SLOMINSKI ASSOCIATES, Tigard, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff.
Douglas G. Pickett, Michael J. Farrell, MARTIN BISCHOFF TEMPLETON LANGSLET HOFFMAN, Portland, OR, John K. Rossman, MOSS BARNETT, Minneapolis, MN, Thane W. Tienson, LANDYE BENNETT BLUMSTEIN, LLP, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendants.
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart filed Findings and Recommendation (#63) on October 7, 2005, in the above entitled case. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate judge's report.See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).
Plaintiff has timely filed objections. I have, therefore, givende novo review of Magistrate Judge Stewart's rulings.
I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation (#63) dated October 7, 2005, in its entirety. Defendant Alegis's motion (#32) for summary judgment and defendant Gann's motion (#40) for summary judgment are granted. In addition, this court sua sponte grants summary judgment to defendant Blue Ribbon and dismisses all claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.