Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice

District Court, D. Oregon·Decided February 4, 2021·No. 3:20-cv-00859·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

LEANNE J. HENSLEY, Plaintiff, V. No. 3:20-cv-00859-JR OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER Defendant.

MOSMAN, J., On September 21, 2020, Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued her Findings and Recommendation (F. & R.) [ECF 22]. Judge Russo recommended that I dismiss Plaintiff’ s Amended Complaint [ECF 21] without prejudice. Upon review, I agree with Judge Russo and DISMISS Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [ECF 21] without prejudice. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of

1 —- AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER

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] ADOPT the F. & R. [ECF 22] as my own opinion. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [ECF 21] is DISMISSED without prejudice. Ms. Hensley has until March 1, 2021, to file an amended ‘complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint as ordered will result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. ITIS so ORDERED. DATED this Oe February, 2021.

MICHAEL W. Mote United States District Judge .

AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER _

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

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

Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice (Hensley v. Oregon Department of Justice) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)