From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Phillips v. Horton

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Sep 15, 2004
Civil No. 04-724-CO (D. Or. Sep. 15, 2004)

Opinion

Civil No. 04-724-CO.

September 15, 2004


ORDER


Magistrate Judge John P. Cooney filed Findings and Recommendation on August 19, 2004, in the above entitled case. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate judge's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).

Plaintiff has timely filed objections. I have, therefore, givende novo review of Magistrate Judge Cooney's rulings.

I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Cooney's Findings and Recommendation filed August 19, 2003, in its entirety. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (#6) is denied, and defendant's motion to dismiss (#8) is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Phillips v. Horton

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Sep 15, 2004
Civil No. 04-724-CO (D. Or. Sep. 15, 2004)
Case details for

Phillips v. Horton

Case Details

Full title:KERBY C. PHILLIPS, Plaintiff, v. DALE A. HORTON, individually and in his…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Sep 15, 2004

Citations

Civil No. 04-724-CO (D. Or. Sep. 15, 2004)