ROBERT JONES, District Judge
Magistrate Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas filed Findings and Recommendation (#69) on December 6, 2007, in the above entitled case. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate judge's report.See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981),cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982).
Defendant has timely filed objections. I have, therefore, givende novo review of Magistrate Judge Ashmanskas's rulings.
I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Ashmanskas's Findings and Recommendation (#69) dated December 5, 2007, in its entirety. Plaintiff's motion (#26) for summary judgment is granted. Accordingly, the defendant's motion (#28) for summary judgment is denied. Plaintiff's request for a new election for the offices of President and Business Manager is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.