Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice

D. Oregon

Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice

DecidedFebruary 1, 2021

Docket3:20-cv-00859

StatusUnknown

This text of Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice (Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice, (D. Or. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN TUHNEI TSETDA TES DICSOTURRITC T FORT HED ISTROIFCO TR EGON

PORTLADNIDV ISION

LEANNJE.H ENSLEY, Plaintiff, v. No3.: 20-cv-00859- OREGODNE PARTMENJTU SOTFI CE OPINIAONNDO RDER Defendant.

MOSMAN,J., OnS epte2m12b,e0 r2M 0a,g isJturdaJgtoeelA i.Re u sissos hueeFrdi ndainndg s Recommen(dF&a. Rt .i[)oE nC2 F2 J]u.d Rgues rseoc ommtehnIadd tei ds mPilsasi ntiffs AmendCeodm pl[aEiC2nF1tw ] i thporuetj uUdpiorcnee v.iI ae gwr,we ietJ hu dRgues asnod DISMItShcSia sws iet hporuetj udice. DISCUSSION Thmea gisjturdmagateke oe nslr ye commentdota hcteoi uotrnowts h, i acnhpy a rmtayy fiwlrei totbejne cTthiceoo nmisins. o bto ubnytd h ree commenodfta hmteai goinssjt urdagtee, burte traeisnpso nfosrim baiklitinhfitgeny ad le termiTnhcaeot uiirogstne .n erreaqlultiyor ed makaed e ndoevtoe rmriengaatrtidhoionpns oger toifto hnrese poorsr pte cfiifnideoidrn gs

recommeanstd aowth iiaocnonh b jeicmstai do2en8U. . S§.6 C3.6 (b)H(olw)e(vCe)cr.o, m it he inso rte qutiorre evdid eenw o,vo oru ndaenroy t hsetra ntdhafaerc dt,ou ral le gcaoln cloufs ions the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F. & R. to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F. & R. depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F. & R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge Russo’s findings and recommendation, and I ADOPT the F. & R. [ECF 22] as my own opinion. The case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Ms. Hensley has until March 1, 2021, to file an amended complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this Le of February, 2021. )

MICHAEL W. MOBMAN United States Distfict Judge

2 — OPINION AND ORDER

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN TUHNEI TSETDA TES DICSOTURRITC T FORT HED ISTROIFCO TR EGON

PORTLADNIDV ISION

LEANNJE.H ENSLEY, Plaintiff, v. No3.: 20-cv-00859- OREGODNE PARTMENJTU SOTFI CE OPINIAONNDO RDER Defendant.

MOSMAN,J., OnS epte2m12b,e0 r2M 0a,g isJturdaJgtoeelA i.Re u sissos hueeFrdi ndainndg s Recommen(dF&a. Rt .i[)oE nC2 F2 J]u.d Rgues rseoc ommtehnIadd tei ds mPilsasi ntiffs AmendCeodm pl[aEiC2nF1tw ] i thporuetj uUdpiorcnee v.iI ae gwr,we ietJ hu dRgues asnod DISMItShcSia sws iet hporuetj udice. DISCUSSION Thmea gisjturdmagateke oe nslr ye commentdota hcteoi uotrnowts h, i acnhpy a rmtayy fiwlrei totbejne cTthiceoo nmisins. o bto ubnytd h ree commenodfta hmteai goinssjt urdagtee, burte traeisnpso nfosrim baiklitinhfitgeny ad le termiTnhcaeot uiirogstne .n erreaqlultiyor ed makaed e ndoevtoe rmriengaatrtidhoionpns oger toifto hnrese poorsr pte cfiifnideoidrn gs

recommeanstd aowth iiaocnonh b jeicmstai do2en8U. . S§.6 C3.6 (b)H(olw)e(vCe)cr.o, m it he inso rte qutiorre evdid eenw o,vo oru ndaenroy t hsetra ntdhafaerc dt,ou ral le gcaoln cloufs ions the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F. & R. to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F. & R. depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F. & R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge Russo’s findings and recommendation, and I ADOPT the F. & R. [ECF 22] as my own opinion. The case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Ms. Hensley has until March 1, 2021, to file an amended complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this Le of February, 2021. )

MICHAEL W. MOBMAN United States Distfict Judge

2 — OPINION AND ORDER

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hensley-v-oregon-department-of-justice-ord-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack