Arapoff v. Lebanon
Arapoff v. Lebanon
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
DIMITRI ARAPOFF,
Plaintiff, Civ. No. 6:19-cv-57-MK
v. ORDER
CITY OF LEBANON, et al.,
Defendants. _____________________________
MCSHANE, Judge: Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai filed a Findings and Recommendation (#32), and the matter is now before this court. See
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Although neither party filed objections, I reviewed the legal principles de novo.1 United States v. Bernhardt,
840 F.2d 1441, 1445(9th Cir. 1998). I find no error and conclude the report is correct. Magistrate Judge Kasubhai’s Findings and Recommendation (#32) is adopted. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (#24) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 28th day of July, 2020. _______/s/ Michael J. McShane________ Michael McShane United States District Judge
1 After the time to file objections passed, Plaintiff filed a proposed judgment (#33). There, plaintiff requests post judgment interest of 9%. Under
28 U.S.C. § 1961, interest is calculated at the 1 year treasury yield for the calendar week before entry of the judgment. That rate is .15%. https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart- center/interest-rates/pages/TextView.aspx?data=yield (last visited May 14, 2020). 1 – ORDER
Reference
- Status
- Unknown