IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MICAHEL JAMES HARNED, No. 3:21-cv-00878-AR

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; and MERCK & CO., Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Armistead issued a Findings and Recommendation on May 17, 2022, in which he recommends that the Court grant the United States’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jursidiction and Merck & Co.’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, and that the claims be dismissed without prejudice. F&R, ECF 28. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt,

(9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge’s report to which objections have been made). The Court finds no error with Judge Armistead’s recommendation that the Court grant Defendants’ motions to dismiss and that the claim against the United States be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff, however, should be

given leave to amend his products liability claim against Merck & Co. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS in part Magistrate Judge Armistead’s Findings & Recommendation [28]. The Court GRANTS the United States’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction [3] and Merck & Co.’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim [8]. Plaintiff’s claim against the United States is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff’s claim against Merck & Co. is dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within 14 days of this Order. Failure to file an amended complaint will result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________A__u_g_u_s_t _8_,_ 2_0_2__2_____.

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge