IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MARIA MENDOZA, an individual, No. 3:21-cv-01503-JR

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

CITY OF PORTLAND, by and through PORTLAND POLICE BUREAU, a municipal corporation; PORTLAND POLICE OFFICER JOHN DOE 1, in his individual and official capacity; PORTLAND POLICE OFFICER JOHN DOE 2, in his individual and official capacity; and PORTLAND POLICE OFFICER JANE DOE, in her individual and official capacity, Defendants.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation on July 21, 2023, in which she recommends that the Court grant Defendant City of Portland’s motion for summary judgment. F&R, ECF 38. 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). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court finds no error. CONCLUSION The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Russo’s Findings and Recommendation [38]. Accordingly, Defendant City of Portland’s Motion for Summary Judgment [23] is granted and the remaining state law claims are remanded to state court. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___S_e__p_te_m__b_e_r_ 2__8_, _2_0_2_3______.

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge