IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

LENA ARISTON, No. 3:21-CV-01669-HL

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE; LOUIS DEJOY, Postmaster General of the United States; and UNITED STATES MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,

Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Andrew Hallman issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 1, 2023, in which he recommends that this Court grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. F&R, ECF 41. 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 and Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 43. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 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 and Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court adopts in full Magistrate Judge Hallman’s Findings and Recommendation [41]. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF 31] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff’s fourth claim for relief, alleging discrimination based on age, is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff’s second, fifth, and sixth claims for relief, alleging hostile work

environment and constructive discharge, are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff’s seventh claim for relief, alleging a failure to act, is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _____S__e_p_te__m_b_e_r_ _2_6_, _2_0_2_3_.

___________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge