Olive v. Robinson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 OSCAR LEE OLIVE IV, CASE NO. C20-0356JLR-BAT 11 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT v. AND RECOMMENDATION HAYLEY MARIE ROBINSON, Defendant.

15 This matter comes before the court on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Brian A. Tsuchida (R&R (Dkt. # 27)). Having carefully reviewed the foregoing, all other relevant documents, and the governing law, the court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. # 27) and DISMISSES Defendant Hayley Marie Robinson’s counterclaim.

20 A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). “The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” Id. The court reviews de novo those portions of the report and recommendation to which specific written objection is made. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). When no objections are filed, the court need not review de novo the report and recommendation. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005).

6 Here, no party has objected to Magistrate Judge Tsuchida’s Report and Recommendation. (See Dkt.) Thus, the court need not review de novo the Report and Recommendation. See Wang, 416 F.3d at 1000. Moreover, the court has examined the record before it, including Magistrate Judge Tsuchida’s Report and Recommendation, and finds the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning persuasive in light of that record.

11 Accordingly, the court ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send copies of this order to the parties and to Magistrate Judge Tsuchida.

13 Dated this 6th day of July, 2021.

A 16 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge