Source: http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020170512806/ABRAHAM%20v.%20CORIZON%20HEALTH,%20INC
Timestamp: 2017-07-23 04:35:54
Document Index: 49886339

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 12101', '§ 12101', '§ 12132', '§ 659', '§ 636', '§ 659']

No. 3:16-cv-01877-PK. | ABRAHAM v. CORIZON HEALTH, INC. | 42 U.S.C. 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act | By ANNA J. BROWN | Leagle.com
ABRAHAM v. CORIZON HEALTH, INC.
No. 3:16-cv-01877-PK.
ANDREW ABRAHAM, on behalf of himself, and for all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
CORIZON HEALTH, INC., Defendants.
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other Source: PACER
Andrew Abraham, Plaintiff, represented by Carl Lee Post , Law Offices of Daniel Snyder.
Andrew Abraham, Plaintiff, represented by Daniel J. Snyder , Law Offices of Daniel Snyder & John D. Burgess , Law Offices of Daniel Snyder.
Corizon Health, Inc., Defendant, represented by Nathan D. Sramek , Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt & Anne M. Talcott , Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt.
Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#16) on April 10, 2017, in which he recommends this Court grant Defendant Corizon Health, Inc.'s Motion (#7) to Dismiss certain claims al by Plaintiff Andrew Abraham pursuant to Title II and Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and Oregon Revised Statutes § 659A.142. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 (b).
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, this Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record novo. See Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009). See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en bane). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court does not find any error.
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#16). Accordingly, Court GRANTS Defendant Corizon Health's Motion (#7) to Dismiss and DISMISSES with prejudice aintiff's First Claim for Relief under Title II of the ADA, DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff's Third Claim for Relief under Title III of the ADA, and DISMISSES without prejudice Plainti's Fourth Claim Relief under Oregon Revised Statute § 659A.142.
This matter is returned to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings as appropriate.