From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. Jack Hozack Co., Inc.

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Nov 13, 2000
Civil No. 00-734-ST (D. Or. Nov. 13, 2000)

Opinion

Civil No. 00-734-ST

November 13, 2000


ORDER


On October 11, 2000, Magistrate Judge Stewart filed her Findings and Recommendation recommending that defendant's motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to transfer venue should be granted and that this action be transferred to the Western District of Washington. Plaintiff has tiled no objection.

The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.Campbell v. United States District Court, 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974).

No clear error appears on the face of the record, and I adopt the Finding and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Magistrate's Judge's Findings and Recommendation, (doc. 21), is adopted. Defendant's motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to transfer venue, (doc. 9), is granted as followed: This action is transferred to the Western District of Washington.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Wright v. Jack Hozack Co., Inc.

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Nov 13, 2000
Civil No. 00-734-ST (D. Or. Nov. 13, 2000)
Case details for

Wright v. Jack Hozack Co., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MARILYN R. WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. JACK HOZACK CO., INC., a Washington…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Nov 13, 2000

Citations

Civil No. 00-734-ST (D. Or. Nov. 13, 2000)