United States District Court, D. Oregon
Linda L. Marshall, Lake Oswego OR, Shawn M. Sornson, SHAWN M. SORNSON PC, Salem, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff.
Jeffrey I. Hasson, DAVENPORT & HASSON LLP, Portland, OR, Attorney for Defendants.
MARCO A. HERNNDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings and Recommendation  on August 7, 2014, in which she recommends that the Court should grant in part and deny in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Defendants timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and 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).
I have carefully considered Defendants' objections and conclude that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the 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.
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation . Therefore, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss  is denied with respect to Plaintiff's first and second claims for relief, and granted with respect to Plaintiff's ...