Jackson v. Multnomah County et al, No. 3:2012cv00974 - Document 12 (D. Or. 2012)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Hubels recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R 8 as my own opinion. Judge Hubel described the deficiencies in plaintiffs original complaint and granted plaintiff leave to amend it. Plaintiffs Amended Complaint failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed on 9/26/12 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION GLASKER JACKSON, No. 3:12-cv-00974-HU Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. MULTNOMAH COUNTY, and MICHAEL D. SCHRUNK, District Attorney, Defendants. MOSMAN, J., On August 20, 2012, Magistrate Judge Hubel issued his Findings and Recommendation ( F&R ) [8] in the above-captioned case recommending that this case be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff objected [11]. 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 1 OPINION AND ORDER 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 Hubel s recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [8] as my own opinion. Judge Hubel described the deficiencies in plaintiff s original complaint and granted plaintiff leave to amend it. Plaintiff s Amended Complaint failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. DATED this 26th day of September, 2012. /s/ Michael W. Mosman____ MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Judge 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.
