IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

RONALD SATISH EMRIT, Case No. 6:20-cv-00024-MK ORDER Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, WASHINGTON REDSKINS, and DANIEL SNYDER,

Defendants, _______________________________________ AIKEN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai filed his Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”) (Doc. 6) recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to follow court orders and failure to prosecute. This matter is now before me. See

(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). No objections were timely filed. Although this relieves me of my obligation to perform a de novo review, I retain the obligation to “make an informed, final decision.” Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist.,

, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), overruled on other grounds, United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

, 1121–22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Magistrates Act does not specify a standard of review in cases where no objections are filed. Ray v. Astrue,

, *1 (D. Or. May 7, 2012). Following the recommendation of the Rules Advisory Committee, the Court review the F&R for “clear error on the face of the record[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory

committee’s note (1983) (citing Campbell v. United States District Court,

(9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Vonn,

, 64 n.6 (2002) (stating that, “[i]n the absence of a clear legislative mandate, the Advisory Committee Notes provide a reliable source of insight into the meaning of” a federal rule). The Court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Kasubhai’s F&R. Accordingly, the Court adopts the F&R (Doc. 6) in its entirety. This action is dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this _8_t_h_ day of September 2020.

____________/s_/_A_n_n__ A__ik_e_n___________ Ann Aiken United States District Judge