From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thompson v. Inman

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Dec 28, 2022
6:21-cv-01231-MK (D. Or. Dec. 28, 2022)

Opinion

6:21-cv-01231-MK

12-28-2022

RANDY THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. WALKER PATTERSON INMAN III, Defendant.


ORDER

Michael McShane United States District Judge

Magistrate Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai filed a Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 34), and the matter is now before this Court on Plaintiff's objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). I review de novo. United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1445 (9th Cir. 1998). I find no error and conclude the report is correct.

Magistrate Judge Kasubhai's Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 34) is adopted in full. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motions (ECF Nos. 6, 8, 20, 32, & 33) are DENIED as moot. The case is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Thompson v. Inman

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Dec 28, 2022
6:21-cv-01231-MK (D. Or. Dec. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Thompson v. Inman

Case Details

Full title:RANDY THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. WALKER PATTERSON INMAN III, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, District of Oregon

Date published: Dec 28, 2022

Citations

6:21-cv-01231-MK (D. Or. Dec. 28, 2022)

Citing Cases

Hui Xu v. LightSmyth Techs.

Because all of Plaintiff's allegations of unlawful employment practices occurred before September 29, 2019,…