Cahill v. Nike, Inc.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
KELLY CAHILL, SARA JOHNSTON, No. 3:18-cv-01477-JR LINDSAY ELIZABETH, and HEATHER HENDER, individually and on behalf of ORDER others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
NIKE, INC., an Oregon Corporation,
Defendant.
HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation on September 30, 2022, in which she recommends that the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendant’s Motion to Seal [171] as set out in the Findings and Recommendation and grant the non-party media organizations’ Motion to Intervene [205] to the extent they request intervention for the limited purpose of challenging the parties’ stipulated redactions in regard to the briefing surrounding plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and denied in all other respects with leave to renew. F&R, ECF 273. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge’s report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court finds no error. CONCLUSION The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Russo’s Findings and Recommendation [273]. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Seal [171] is granted in part and denied in part and the non-party media organizations’ Motion to Intervene [205] are granted to the extent that they requested intervention for the limited purpose of challenging the parties’ stipulated redactions
in regard to the briefing surrounding plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and denied in all other respects with leave to renew. IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: ______N__o_v_e_m__b_e_r_ 1_3_,_ 2__0_2_2___.
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cahill v. Nike, Inc. (Cahill v. Nike, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.