Legal Opinion
Travis v. Knappenberger
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided August 22, 2001No. Nos. CV 00-393-HU, CV 00-1391-HUPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
REDDEN, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Hubei filed his Findings and Recommendation on June 14, 2001, granting in part and denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss parts of the Fourth Amended complaint in the Travis case (00-393) and parts of the Amended Complaint in the Kennedy-Walker case (00-1391). The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Review by the district court of the magistrate judge’s determination is de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Plaintiffs have filed a timely objection to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- In Re Glenfed, Inc. Securities LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Cooper v. PickettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Concha v. LondonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Phelps v. 3PD, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2009
- In Re Urethane Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2010
- Carpenter Co. v. BASF SEDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2010
- Jason v. Adobe, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2025
- Warre v. Portfolio Services Limited, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2023