Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pringle v. State

United States District Court, D. Oregon

February 25, 2014

EUGENE DAYTON PRINGLE, JR., pro se, Mining Claims S & D 1 #154263; S & D 2 #154262; S & D 3 #154261 Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF OREGON, John Kitzhaber; ATTORNEY GENERAL, Ellen Rosenblum; DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS, Erik Metz, OREGON PARKS & RECREATION, Jan Houck; OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE; UNITED STATES, Attorney General, Eric Holder; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, Ken Salazar, Brian Bair, Fisheries Biologist, TEAMS Enterprise; Robert Nykamp, Archaeologist, TEAMS Enterprise; Tim Holden, Wildlife Biologist, Above & Beyond Ecosystems Enterprise; THE FRESH WATER TRUST, Peter Paquet, RBP, LLC; John and Jane Doe 1 to 999 to be named, Defendants.

Eugene Dayton Pringle, Jr, White City, OR, Pro se Plaintiff.

Stephanie M. Parent, Jacqueline Sadker Kamins, OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, SPECIAL LITIGATION UNIT, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendants.

ORDER

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ, District Judge.

Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation [38] on December 23, 2013, recommending that Defendants' motion to dismiss [18] be granted and that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, as here, 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).

I have carefully considered Plaintiff's objections and conclude that these objections do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation [38]. Accordingly, Defendants' motion to dismiss [18] is GRANTED and this action is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.