Xia v. Miller et al, No. 3:2020cv01468 - Document 26 (D. Or. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION & ORDER: Adopting the magistrate's Findings and Recommendation 24 . Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 19 is Denied, Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 21 is Granted, and this case is Dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 12/6/21 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Xia v. Miller et al Doc. 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION JIWEIXIA, No. 3:20-cv-01468-JR Plaintiff, v. LOREN K. MILLER, Director of the Nebraska Service Center of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, et al., OPINION AND ORDER Defendants. MOSMAN,J., On November 18, 2021, Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo issued her Findings and Recommendation ("F. & R.") [ECF 24]. Judge Russo recommends that I deny Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 19], grant Defendants' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 21], and enter judgment dismissing this case. Objections were due on December 2, 2021, but none were filed. I agree with Judge Russo. STANDARD OF REVIEW The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F. & R. to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F. & R. depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F. & R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge Russo's recommendation, I ADOPT her F. & R. [ECF 24] as my own opinion, I DENY Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 19], GRANT Defendants' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 21], and I DISMISS this case with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this h<\1/ day of December, 2021. ;VvvJ!Vv.rrl½s- MICHAEL W. MOSMA]N United States Distriotttidge 2 - OPINION AND ORDER
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
