Pinckard v. Laughland-Pinckard

OWEN M. PANNER

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). When either party objects to any portion of a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court makes a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F. 2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).

Here, defendant objects to the Report and Recommendation, so I have reviewed this matter de novo. I agree with Judge Clarke that exercising personal jurisdiction over defendant in this district is reasonable and complies with due process. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke.

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#7) is adopted. Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (#3) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE