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

S.D., and ex rel. D.D. and Case No. 6:17-cv-00770-MK Next Friend of M.D ORDER AND OPINION Plaintiffs, vs. CLIDE SAIKTI, e¢ ai., Defendants. AIKEN. District Judge: Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai has filed his Findings and

- Recommendation (“F&R”) (doc. 125) recommending that this case should be dismissed with prejudice and that plaintiff should be precluded from filing a fifth —

amended complaint. The matter 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 judge’s report. See

(b)(D): McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore PAGE 1 -ORDER

_ Business Machines, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1981), cert denied,

(1982). Plaintiffs have filed timely objections! (docs. 141 and 142), and defendants have filed a response to those objections (doc. 148). Thus, this Court reviews the F&R de novo. This Court has reviewed plaintiffs’ objections and attached documents and find no error in Magistrate Judge Kasubhai’s F&R. Thus, the Court adopts the F&R (doc. 125) in its entirety. Accordingly, this action is dismissed, with prejudice. All other pending motions and requests are denied as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. □□ Dated this A day of January, 2020.

Ann Aiken United States District Judge

1 This Court has granted three extension of time for plaintiffs to file objections. (docs. 131, 135, 138.) PAGE 2 -ORDER