IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION

BILLY GOSTEVSKYH, No, 6:15-cv-02336-TC ORDER Plaintiff, v. JASON MYERS and MARION COUNTY, a government entity, Defendants.

AIKEN, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin has filed his Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”’) (doc. 78) recommending that this Court deny defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 49) This case is now before me. See

(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge’s F&R, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate

1-ORDER

judge’s report. See

(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc.,

, 1813 (9th Cir. 1981), cert denied,

(1982). Defendants have filed timely objections (doc. 83) to the F&R and plaintiff has filed a timely response to those objections. (doc. 89) Thus, this Court reviews the F&R de novo. Having reviewed the objections, briefing on the motion for summary Judgment, as well as the entire file of this case, the Court finds no error in Judge Coffin’s F&R. Thus, the Court adopts the F&R (doc. 78) in its entirely. Defendants’ motion for

summary judgment (doc. 49} is DENIED. ITIS SO ORDERED. Dated this 30 day of September 2019. Oe. Aen □ AnmnAiken United States District Judge

ORDER