Owens v. Latitude Properties Inc. ( 2021 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON KHEOSHI OWENS, No. 3:19-cv-01331-JR Plaintiff, ORDER v. LATITUDE PROPERTIES, INC. fka JULAY PROPERTIES INC., dba LATITUDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT and 45 MAIN PROPERTIES; KELCY KING; NEAL COLLINS; ENTRUST ADMINISTRATION fbo CHARLES E. NOL; TERRANCE P. CAVANAGH; and CARL D. VANDERZANDEN, Defendants. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation on January 20, 2021, in which she recommends that this Court deny Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. F&R, ECF 42. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Defendants filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. Defs. Objs., ECF 44 and 45. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & 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 Defendants’ objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Russo’s Findings and Recommendation [42]. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: _______M_a__rc_h_ _2_8_,_ 2_0_2__1___. ___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge