From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. Myrtck

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Dec 8, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-00618-YY (D. Or. Dec. 8, 2017)

Opinion

No. 2:16-cv-00618-YY

12-08-2017

EVERETT JAMES SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. JOHN MYRTCK, et al., Defendants.


OPINION AND ORDER MOSMAN, J.,

On September 18, 2017, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [77], recommending that Defendants' Partial Motion for Summary Judgment [58] and Motion for Summary Judgment [63] should be GRANTED. Plaintiff Scott did not file objections.

DISCUSSION

The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [77] as my own opinion. Defendants' Partial Motion for Summary Judgment [58] and Motion for Summary Judgment [63] are GRANTED

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 8th day of December, 2017.

/s/_________

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Scott v. Myrtck

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Dec 8, 2017
No. 2:16-cv-00618-YY (D. Or. Dec. 8, 2017)
Case details for

Scott v. Myrtck

Case Details

Full title:EVERETT JAMES SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. JOHN MYRTCK, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Date published: Dec 8, 2017

Citations

No. 2:16-cv-00618-YY (D. Or. Dec. 8, 2017)