IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MICHAEL J. ROBBINS, Case No. 3:25-cv-00760-YY Plaintiff, ORDER v.

PORT OF PORTLAND (PDX) TSA,

Defendant.

BAGGIO, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge You issued her Findings and Recommendations on August 18, 2025, in which she recommends that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s case without prejudice. F&R, ECF No. 23. 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 Recommendations. Pl.’s Obj., ECF No. 25. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations, 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 Plaintiffs objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings and Recommendations. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge You’s Findings and Recommendations [23]. Therefore, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [19] should be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to allege a plausible claim for relief. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this _30thday of October, 2025.

United States District Judge

2 — ORDER