Munoz v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Delaware corporation

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MIGUEL MUNOZ, an individual, No. 2:21-cv-00186-HL

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Hallman issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 9, 2022, in which he recommends that this Court deny Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. F&R, ECF 67. 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). Defendant filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. Def. Obj., ECF 69. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge’s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.

2003) (en banc). The Court has carefully considered Defendant’s objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Hallman’s Findings and Recommendation [67]. Therefore, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [52] is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: __S_e_p_t_e_m__b_e_r_ 1_6_,_ 2__0_2_2____.

___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge