John V. Acosta

“I DENY IN PART Defendants' Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Testimony of Donald R. Ostergard, M.D. [ECF 32].”

“Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta on all grounds except for his decision to deny Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs gross negligence claim. ... I GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 30].”

“The court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations (doc #80 and #81). Accordingly, Defendants' motions for summary judgment (doc #20, #24, and #31) are GRANTED.”

“the Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 24. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment, ECF 16. ... awarding Plaintiff damages in the amount of $1,538,444.58 for out-of-pocket expenses and lost profits, plus pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.”

“The Court ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation (ECF 47), as supplemented herein after considering Plaintiff's new argument and evidence. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment, ECF 34.”

“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART as to Defendants' qualified immunity affirmative defense and DENIED on all other grounds, Dkt. 29”

“(2) Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment Monell violation and negligence claims, Dkt. 19.”

“Plaintiff’s motion for a declaratory judgment on his first claim for relief (ECF 40) is DENIED.”

“The State Defendants motion to dismiss (ECF 56) is GRANTED IN PART. It is granted with respect to Plaintiff’s first claim for relief, which is dismissed without prejudice. The Court reserves ruling on the remainder of the State Defendants’ motion to dismiss.”

“Defendant Vance’s special motion to strike under Oregon Revised Statutes § 31.150 (ECF 85) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Vance are dismissed without prejudice.”

“This Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 41, DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 37”

“This Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 41, DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 37, and DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' Motion for Relief, ECF 51, and DISMISSES this case with prejudice.”

“DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' Motion for Relief, ECF 51”

“I GRANT the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and DENY the Motion for Summary Judgment.”

“I GRANT Mr. Inbasagaran's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [36] and DENY his Motion for Summary Judgment [37].”

“GRANTS Bank Defendants' Motion (#73) to Dismiss; DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiffs' Claims One, Two, Three, and Thirteen against Bank Defendants; and DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiffs' Claim Nine against Bank Defendants.”

“GRANTS State Farm's Motion (#120) for Summary Judgment and DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiffs' Claims One and Three against Defendant State Farm.”

“The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation (#88) and, accordingly, GRANTS Defendant's Motion (#62) for Summary Judgment based on Mertz's failure to file proof of loss for the property at issue and DENIES as moot Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in all other respects.”

“The Court also DISMISSES Plaintiff's Motion (#66) for Summary Judgment and Motion (#67) to Dismiss Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.”

“The Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 25. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF 1) is DENIED. The Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability on the basis that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).”

“The Court ADOPTS IN PART AND MODIFIES IN PART Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings & Recommendation [42], and therefore, Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees [26] and Plaintiff's cost bill [39] are granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is awarded $41,796 in attorney's fees and $777.44 in costs.”