IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

JOHN HARPER, Case No. 3:25-cv-00666-YY

Plaintiff, ORDER

v.

ARTISAN AND TRUCKERS CASUALTY COMPANY, a.k.a., PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE CORPORATION, INC.

Defendant.

John Harper, Portland, OR. Pro se.

Eric Jay Neal, Lether Law Group, 1848 Westlake Avenue N, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98109. Attorney for Defendant.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.

On September 16, 2025, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”), ECF 18. The F&R recommends that this Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, ECF 5, grant Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 15, and dismiss the complaint without leave to amend. No party filed objections. This Court adopts Magistrate Judge You’s F&R in full. 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 that are not objected to. 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,

. No party having filed objections, this Court has reviewed the F&R and accepts Judge You’s findings and conclusions. The F&R, ECF 18, is ADOPTED in full. This Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, ECF 5, GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF 15, and DISMISSES the complaint with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13th day of November, 2025.

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