Opinion
No. 3:14-cv-00146-PK
07-07-2014
MICHAEL G. SCHWERN, Plaintiff, v. NÓIRÍN PLUNKETT, Defendant.
Bear Wilner-Nugent Counselor & Attorney at Law LLC Attorney for Plaintiff Erin K. Olson Law Office of Erin Olson, PC Attorney for Defendant
ORDER
Bear Wilner-Nugent
Counselor & Attorney at Law LLC
Attorney for Plaintiff Erin K. Olson
Law Office of Erin Olson, PC
Attorney for Defendant HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Papak issued a Findings and Recommendation [21] on April 22, 2014, in which he recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff's motion to strike pursuant to ORS § 31.150. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and 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).
I have carefully considered Plaintiff's objections and conclude that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation [21]. Therefore, Plaintiff's motion to strike [4] pursuant to ORS § 31.150 is denied and the automatic stay of discovery is lifted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ
United States District Judge