United States of America v. Carla Hall; Veronica Hall; and Chris Harris

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No.: 2:25-cv-01523-HL

Plaintiff, v. ORDER

CARLA HALL; VERONICA HALL; and CHRIS HARRIS,

Defendants.

Adrienne Nelson, District Judge: United States Magistrate Judge Andrew Hallman issued Findings and Recommendations on March 5, 2026, recommending that plaintiff’s motion for default judgment be granted and judgment be entered against defendants. Objections, if any, were due March 19, 2026, and no party has filed objections. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). A district court judge 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). In the absence of objections, no review is required, and no standard of review is prescribed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152-54 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nonetheless, a district court judge is not precluded from reviewing the report sua sponte under a de novo, or any other, standard. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154; Decker v. Berryhill, 856 F.3d 659, 663 (9th Cir. 2017). Courts in this District have followed the Advisory Committee’s recommendation that, when no timely objection is filed, findings and recommendations be reviewed for “clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment; see, e.g., Hayden v. United States, 147 F. Supp. 3d 1125, 1127 (D. Or. 2015) (following the recommendation of the Advisory Committee and reviewing magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations for “clear error on the face of the record”); Toohey v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp. Health & Welfare Plan, 673 F. Supp. 2d 1223, 1224 (D. Or. 2009) (same). Because no party in this case has made objections, this Court reviews Judge Hallman’s Findings and Recommendations for clear error on the face of the record. Finding no such error, the Court ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation, ECF 9. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment, ECF 8, is GRANTED. Judgment will follow.

IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 14th day of July, 2026.

Adrienne Nelson United States District Judge