Legal Opinion
Kersten v. Quick Collect, Inc.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided January 22, 2016No. Case No. 1:14 CV 00668-CLPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Ann Aiken, United States District Judge
Magistrate‘Judge Clarke filed-his Find: ings and Recommendation. on December 22, 2015. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 686(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R.Civ.P. 72(b). No objections,have been timely filed. This relieves me óf my obligation to give the factual findings de novo review. Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir.1983). See also Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo. I find no error.
Therefore; it is hereby ordered that, I adopt Judge…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Martin Gonzalez, Sr. v. City of MaywoodCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Barber v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022