Summary
finding that causation had not been established in a spoliation claim, requiring termination of that claim
Summary of this case from Melo v. OregonOpinion
No. 3:14-cv-01245-JE
03-11-2015
NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE, As subrogee of George's Shop and Rock Vale Oregon, Plaintiff, v. BEALL CORPORATION, an Oregon Corporation; And HENDRICKSON USA, LLC, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER MOSMAN, J.,
On February 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge Jelderks issued his Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [13], recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [7] should be GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and that Defendant Hendrickson's Motion for Joinder [8] should be GRANTED. No objections to the Findings and Recommendation were filed.
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Jelderks' recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [13] as my own opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 11th day of March, 2015.
/s/ Michael W. Mosman
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
United States District Judge