Toohey v. Cigna Coporation et al
Filing
64
ORDER: Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 45 ; Motion to Strike 47 ; Motion to Dismiss 50 ; and Motion to Strike 52 . Findings and Recommendation 62 is ADOPTED. Signed on 12/2/09 by Judge Ancer L. Haggerty. (mkk)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT C O U R T F O R T H E D I S T R I C T OF O R E G O N
T O N I L. TOOHEY~ individually, and as P e r s o n a l R e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e H e i r s and t h e Estate o f F R A N K R. TOOHEY, Deceased, Plaintiff, ORDER C i v i l No. 0 9 - 8 8 - S T
v.
T H E WYNDHAM WORLDWIDE CORPORATION HEALTH & WELFARE PLAN, E M P L O Y E E BENEFITS COMMITTEE W Y N D H A M WORLDWIDE CORPORATION, LIFE INSURANCE C O M P A N Y OF N O R T H A M E R I C A ~ a n d WYNDHAM WORLDWIDE CORPORATION, Defendants.
H A G G E R T Y , D i s t r i c t Judge: Magistrate Judge Stewart referred to this court a Findings and Recommendation [62] in this matter. T h e Magistrate Judge recommends that defendants' Motions to Dismiss [45 a n d 50] a n d Motions to Strike Jury Demand [47 a n d 52] b e granted. No objections were filed, a n d the case was referred to this court.
ORDER-l
The matter is n o w before m e pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 7 2 ( b ) . W h e n n o t i m e l y o b j e c t i o n i s filed, t h e c o u r t n e e d o n l y s a t i s f y i t s e l f t h a t t h e r e i s n o c l e a r e r r o r o n t h e face o f t h e r e c o r d i n o r d e r t o a c c e p t t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n o f t h e M a g i s t r a t e .
Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974).
N o c l e a r e r r o r a p p e a r s o n t h e face o f t h e r e c o r d . T h i s c o u r t a d o p t s t h e F i n d i n g s a n d Recommendation. CONCLUSION T h e Findings and Recommendation [62] is ADOPTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this
~ d a y o f D e c e m b e r , 2009.
~L.~"~
U n i t e d States D i s t r i c t J u d g e
ORDER-2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
