Rahimi v. City of Sheridan

Docket 3:20-cv-01607

Filed
2020-09-15
Terminated
2021-07-28
Case type
cv

Outcome

other dismissal

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=79 OFFICE=3 DOCKET=2001607 FILEDATE=09/15/2020 DISP=14, PROCPROG=4, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON KHOSROW RAHIMI, No. 3:20-cv-01607-AC Plaintiff, ORDER v. CITY OF SHERIDAN and STATE OF OREGON, Defendants. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge John Acosta issued a Findings and Recommendation on June 28, 2021, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss. F&R, ECF 23. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. Pl. Obj., ECF 25. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge’s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings & Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta’s Findings and Recommendation [23]. Therefore, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss [9], [18] are GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: _______J_u_ly_ _2_8_,_ 2_0_2__1_____. ____________________________ MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.