Rhoades v. Rosenblum et al, No. 3:2018cv00123 - Document 54 (D. Or. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 47 in full. I DENY Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 38 . I refer this matter back to Judge Beckerman for an appropriate scheduling order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 11/26/2019 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Rhoades v. Rosenblum et al Doc. 54 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON CYNTHIA E. RHOADES, an individual, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:18-cv-00123-SB v. OPINION AND ORDER ELLEN ROSENBLUM, in her official capacity; FREDERICK BOSS, in his official capacity; DAWN FAULKNER, in her official capacity; LYNN GAGE, in her official capacity; ANGIE SIFUENTEZ, in her official capacity; and ROBERT KORESKI, in his official capacity, Defendants. MOSMAN,J., On October 7, 2019, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") [47], recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint [38] be denied. Defendants objected [49], and Plaintiff filed a response to the objection [53]. 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 1 -OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 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)(l)(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 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)(l)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [47] in full. I DENY Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint [38]. I refer this matter back to Judge Beckerman for an appropriate scheduling order. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED thi~0day ofNovember, 2019. ~CJ;;,'t!lttsiif::--~ Chief 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.
