Jones, as guardian ad litem for Brandy Tuchscherer v. City of Portland, No. 3:2018cv01485 - Document 25 (D. Or. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 22 as my own opinion. Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses eleven through thirteen 13 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's counterclaim for attorney fees 13 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed on 1/17/2019 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jones, as guardian ad litem for Brandy Tuchscherer v. City of Portland Doc. 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION RANDI JONES, as guardian ad litem for Brandy Tuchscherer No. 3:18-cv-01485-SB Plaintiff, V. OPINION AND ORDER CITY OF PORTLAND, Defendant. MOSMAN,J., On December 21, 2018, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [22], recommending that I GRANT in part and DENY AS MOOT in part Plaintiffs Motion to Strike [13]. Neither party filed objections to the F&R. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the comi, to which any party may file written objections. The comi is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The comi is generally required to make a de nova 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 comi is not required to review, de nova or under any other standard, the factual or legal 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 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 [22] as my own opinion. Plaintiffs motion to strike Defendant's affitmative defenses eleven through thirteen [13] is GRANTED. Plaintiffs motion to strike Defendant's counterclaim for attorney fees [13] is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. ,:yfl"--- ---L1 day of January, 2019. i DATED this 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.
