IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

DEWAYNE BOWLIN, Case No. 6:18 cv 00733-MK ORDER Plaintiff,

v.

DITECH FINANCIAL LLC, FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, and QUALITY LOAN SERVICES CORPORATION OF WASHINGTON,

Defendants, _______________________________________ AIKEN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai has filed his Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”) (Doc. 55) recommending that defendant Federal National Mortgage Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) and defendant Quality Loan Services Corporation of Washington’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 51) should be granted. 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 Mustafa Kasubhai’s F&R. Accordingly, the Court adopts the F&R (Doc. 55) in its entirety. Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. 48 & 51) are granted. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 12th day January, 2021.

___________/_s_/A__n_n_ _A_i_k_e_n___________ Ann Aiken United States District Judge