Wright v. The American's Bulletin et al, No. 3:2010cv06118 - Document 147 (D. Or. 2011)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Papaks recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 129 as my own opinion, 33 , 49 , 53 , 54 , 58 , 60 , 71 , 73 , 79 , 83 , 88 , 90 , 91 , 93 , 95 , 96 , 98 , 101 , 103 , 109 , 110 , 113 , 118 , 120 , 123 , and 125 . Signed on 6/2/2011 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION ANTHONY STEVEN WRIGHT, CV 10-6118-PK Plaintiff, ORDER AND OPINION v. THE AMERICAN S BULLETIN NEWSPAPER CORPORATION and CYNTHIA MARIE BREWER, Defendants. MOSMAN, J., On May 5, 2011, Magistrate Judge Papak issued his Findings and Recommendation ( F&R ) [129] in the above-captioned case recommending that Motions [33], [49], [53], [54], [58], [60], [71], [73], [79], [83], [88], [90], [91], [93], [95], [96], [98], [101], [103], [109], [110], [113], [118], [120], [123], [125], should be denied and that default should be entered against The American's Bulletin as to Mr. Wright's claim for fraud. Mr. Wright objected [141]. 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 OPINION AND ORDER - 1 Thomas v. Arn, 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 Papak s recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [129] as my own opinion. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 2nd day of June, 2011. /s/ Michael W. Mosman MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Court OPINION AND ORDER - 2

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.