IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

DAVID LEE HALL, II, Case No. 6:19-cv-01920-MK ORDER Plaintiff,

v.

TRILLIUM COMMUNITY HEALTH PLAN, OREGON HEALTH PLAN,

Defendant, _______________________________________ AIKEN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai filed his Amended Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”) (doc. 9) recommending that plaintiff’s case be dismissed, with prejudice. 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 judge’s report. See

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

(9th Cir. 1981), cert denied,

(1982). In response to Magistrate Judge Kasubhai’s F&R, plaintiff filed a document which is styled as a complaint. (doc. 11) However, having reviewed the document and in the interest of fairness the Court construes the document as timely objections to the F&R. Thus, the Court reviews the F&R de novo.

Having reviewed the record of this case, the Court finds that the complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Thus, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Kasubhai’s F&R (doc. 9) in its entirety. Accordingly, this action is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this _2_7_t_h_ day of May 2020.

____________/s_/_A_n_n_ _A_i_k_e_n___________ Ann Aiken United States District Judge