Trinh v. Shriners Hospitals for Children

District Court, D. Oregon·Decided November 13, 2023·No. 3:22-cv-01999·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

HUONG TRINH, Case No. 3:22-cv-01999-SB

Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION v.

SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN, a corporation,

Defendant.

Caroline Janzen, Janzen Legal Services, LLC, 4550 SW Hall Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97005. Attorney for Plaintiff.

Sarah Elizabeth Ames Benedict & Meagan A. Himes, Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP, 1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2400, Portland, OR 97201-5630. Attorneys for Defendant.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.

On October 23, 2023, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”), ECF 19, recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF 10, be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. No party filed objections. This Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Beckerman’s F&R. LEGAL STANDARDS Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or

recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. But the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R that are not objected to. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another standard. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. CONCLUSION No party having filed objections, this Court has reviewed the F&R, ECF 19, and accepts

Judge Beckerman’s conclusions. Judge Beckerman’s F&R, ECF 19, is adopted in full. Accordingly, this Court GRANTS IN PART Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 10, but DENIES Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. Plaintiff must file any amended complaint within fourteen (14) days.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13th day of November, 2023.

/s/ Karin J. Immergut Karin J. Immergut United States District Judge

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

Trinh v. Shriners Hospitals for Children, (D. Or. 2023).

Trinh v. Shriners Hospitals for Children (Trinh v. Shriners Hospitals for Children) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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