From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rush v. Howton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Aug 31, 2011
Civil No. 09-6321-TC (D. Or. Aug. 31, 2011)

Opinion

Civil No. 09-6321-TC

08-31-2011

WILLIAM H. RUSH, Petitioner, v. NANCY HOWTON, Respondent.


ORDER

Magistrate Judge Thomas M Coffin has filed his Findings and Recommendation on July 29, 2011. 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 Coffins Findings and Recommendation. Petitioner's petition (#1) is denied. This proceeding is dismissed.

___________________________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Rush v. Howton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Aug 31, 2011
Civil No. 09-6321-TC (D. Or. Aug. 31, 2011)
Case details for

Rush v. Howton

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM H. RUSH, Petitioner, v. NANCY HOWTON, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Aug 31, 2011

Citations

Civil No. 09-6321-TC (D. Or. Aug. 31, 2011)