From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gray v. Marshall

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jun 1, 2017
Civ. No. 6:16-cv-01394-TC (D. Or. Jun. 1, 2017)

Opinion

Civ. No. 6:16-cv-01394-TC

06-01-2017

RICHARD E. GRAY Sr., Plaintiff, v. JANIECE MARSHALL, Defendant.


OPINION and ORDER :

Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Coffin filed a Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 5) and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Although neither party filed objections, I reviewed the legal principles de novo. United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1445 (9th Cir. 1998). I find no error and conclude it is correct.

Therefore, Magistrate Judge Coffin's Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 15) is adopted in its entirety and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim and failure to prosecute. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 1st day of June, 2017.

/s/ Michael J. McShane

Michael J. McShane

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Gray v. Marshall

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jun 1, 2017
Civ. No. 6:16-cv-01394-TC (D. Or. Jun. 1, 2017)
Case details for

Gray v. Marshall

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD E. GRAY Sr., Plaintiff, v. JANIECE MARSHALL, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Jun 1, 2017

Citations

Civ. No. 6:16-cv-01394-TC (D. Or. Jun. 1, 2017)