Professional House Cleaning By Mary G, LLC v. Sonia Medina Lopez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PROFESSIONAL HOUSE CLEANING Case No. 3:24-cv-00555-YY BY MARY G, LLC, an Oregon limited liability corporation, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Plaintiff, v. SONIA MEDINA LOPEZ, an individual, Defendant.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.

No objections to Magistrate Judge You’s Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”), ECF 34, have been filed. For the following reasons, this Court ADOPTS the F&R in full.

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.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(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.” Id. 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, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (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, 474 U.S. at 154.

CONCLUSION Judge You’s F&R, ECF 34, is adopted in full. Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement and Motion for Summary Judgment on Claim for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement/Specific Performance, ECF 26, is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 20th day of January, 2026.

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