Shevchynski v. Velure

Full title: NICK SHEVCHYNSKI, Plaintiff, v. LYLE VELURE, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jun 4, 2007

Civ. No. 07-6077-TC (D. Or. Jun. 4, 2007)

Opinion

Civ. No. 07-6077-TC.

June 4, 2007

ORDER

ANN AIKEN, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Coffin issued his Findings and Recommendation in the above-captioned action on May 8, 2007. Magistrate Judge Coffin recommends that plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The matter is now before me. See 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). Plaintiff arguably has filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation. Upon review of Magistrate Coffin's findings and recommendation, I find no error.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Coffin's Findings and Recommendation (doc. 4) filed May 8, 2007, is ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED. Plaintiff's request for oral argument is denied as unnecessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.