District Court, D. Oregon, 2022

Santos v. NaphCare, Inc.

Santos v. NaphCare, Inc.
District Court, D. Oregon · Decided March 18, 2022
Santos v. NaphCare, Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EDDIE SANTOS, Case No. 3:21-cv-00131-YY Plaintiff, ORDER v. NAPHCARE, INC., an Alabama corporation; WASHINGTON COUNTY, a state body in the State of Oregon; PAT GARRETT, in his capacity as Sheriff of Washington County; ROBERT DAVIS, an individual; JULIE RADOSTITZ, M.D., an individual; CASEY GLADNEY, an individual; RACHEL ECLEVIA, an individual; MARTHA ROJO, an individual; AIMEE ZERFAS, an individual, Defendants.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.

On February 4, 2022, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”). ECF 62. The F&R recommends that this Court grant in part and deny in part the Motion to Dismiss, ECF 35, filed by Defendants Washington County, Sheriff Pat Garrett, and Robert Davis (“County Defendants”). No party filed objections. For the following reasons, the Court ADOPTS Judge You’s F&R in full.

STANDARDS Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. But the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another standard. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

CONCLUSION No party having filed objections, this Court has reviewed the F&R and accepts Judge You’s conclusions. The F&R, ECF 62, is adopted in full. The County Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF 35, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 18th day of March, 2022.

/s/ Karin J. Immergut Karin J. Immergut United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.