IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MICHAEL RAY SWANSON, Case No. 3:24-cv-02047-YY

Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v.

SAFEWAY, INC.,

Defendant.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.

No objections to Judge You’s Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”), ECF 23, have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court ADOPTS the F&R. STANDARDS Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1)(C). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”

But the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn,

, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another standard. Thomas,

. CONCLUSION

Judge You’s F&R, ECF 23, is adopted in full. This Court DISMISSES all claims against Defendant Safeway, Inc. without leave to amend. See Lund v. Cowan,

, 973 (9th Cir. 2021) (“Dismissal without leave to amend is proper if it is clear that the complaint could not be saved by amendment.” (internal quotations omitted)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13th day of November, 2025.

/s/ Karin J. Immergut Karin J. Immergut United States District Judge