BERGLUND v. BOEING COMPANY, INC. (D.Or. 2006)

ROBERT JONES, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas filed Findings and Recommendation (#90) on June 1, 2006, 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). No objections have been timely filed. This relieves me of my obligation to give the factual findingsde novo review. Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Ashmanskas's Findings and Recommendation (#90) dated June 1, 2006, in its entirety. Boeing Company's motion (#76) to dismiss Count One of relator's second amended complaint is denied. Further, the FCA allegations regarding the hundreds of aircraft sold by Boeing using financing guaranteed by the United States Export-Import Bank, including paragraph one on page 34 of the second amended complaint, are stricken pursuant to Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.