Stirling v. China ( 2020 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON JOHN PHILIP STIRLING, Case No. 3:20-cv-00713-SB Plaintiff, ORDER v. CHINA, et al., Defendants. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Beckerman issued a Findings and Recommendation [20] on August 14, 2020, in which she recommends the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint [1] without leave to amend, and deny as moot Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment [9] and Motion for Reconsideration [14]. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before the Court 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). The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and concludes that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Beckerman’s Findings and Recommendation [20]. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s complaint [1] is DISMISSED without leave to amend, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment [9] and Motion for Reconsideration [14] are DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: _________S__e_p__te__m__b_e_r_ _2_1_,_ _2_0_2__0_________________________. MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge