IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION DEBRA K. ALLINGER, No. 3:24-cv-01367-SB Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, Defendant. BAGGIO, J., On 8/20/2024, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [ECF 5], recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice but without leave to re-file in the District of Oregon because venue is improper in this district. Plaintiff objected on 9/16/2024. [ECF 8]. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections.

(b)(1)(B). If a party objects, the court “shall make a de

novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendation to which objection is made.”

§ 636(b)(1)(C). The court is not, however, required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); United States v. Ramos,

(9th Cir. 2023). While the level of scrutiny that the court applies to its F&R review depends on whether a party has filed objections, the court is free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R.

(b)(1)(C); see also Thomas, 474 USS. at 154. Upon review, the Court agrees with Judge Stacie F. Beckerman’s recommendation and ADOPTS the F&R [ECF 5] in full. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 21Stday of October, 2024.

Amy M. Bagger AMY M. BAGGI United States District Judge

2 — OPINION AND ORDER