Legal Opinion
Alleman v. United States
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided April 12, 2005No. Civ. 99-3010-COPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
HOGAN, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge John P. Cooney filed Findings and Recommendation [#138] on January 10, 2005 in the above entitled case. The matter is now before the court 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,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Amoco Production Co. v. Village of GambellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Sandra L. Waldridge v. American Hoechst Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Block v. North Dakota Ex Rel. Board of University & School LandsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- McDonnell Douglas Corporation v. Commodore Business MacHines Inc. And Commodore Business MacHines (Canada) LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Public Lands for the People, Inc. v. United States Department of AgricultureDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2010
- AuCopious, LLC v. SPG14, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- Hazel Green Ranch, LLC v. United States Department of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Hazel Green Ranch, LLC v. United States Department of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012