Zelpro Assembly Solutions, LLC et al v. Stingl Products, LLC et al, No. 3:2011cv00519 - Document 30 (D. Or. 2011)
Court Description: OPINION & ORDER: On August 5, 2011, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued her Findings and Recommendation (F&R) # 25 in the above-captioned case recommending that the motion to intervene filed by NAC Group, Inc. # 15 be granted. No objections were filed. Upon review, I agree with Judge Stewarts recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R # 25 as my own opinion. Signed on August 31st, 2011 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (eo)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION ZELPRO ASSEMBLY SOLUTIONS, LLC et al., No. 3:11-cv-00519-ST Plaintiffs, OPINION AND ORDER v. STINGL PRODUCTS, LLC, et al., Defendants. MOSMAN, J., On August 5, 2011, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued her Findings and Recommendation ( F&R ) [25] in the above-captioned case recommending that the motion to intervene filed by NAC Group, Inc. [15] be granted. No objections were filed. 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. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 1 OPINION AND ORDER 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 Stewart s recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [25] as my own opinion. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 31st day of August, 2011. /s/ Michael W. Mosman____ MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Court 2 OPINION AND ORDER
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
