IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

LINH THI MINH TRAN, No. 3:16-cv-00707-AC

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

OFFICER DARRYN J. KUEHL, OFFICER BENJAMIN J. TOOPS, and OFFICER RYAN KERSEY,

Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge John Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation [164] on January 14, 2020, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 169. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge’s report.

(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall,

(9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta’s Findings and Recommendation [164]. Therefore, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss [145] [146] are GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint [139] is dismissed without leave to amend. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___N_o_v_e_m__b_e_r_ _1_5_, _2_0_2_0____.

___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge