Summary
holding that sex-based equal protection claims "are justified only if substantially related to an important governmental objective, and "a party seeking to uphold government action based on sex must establish an exceedingly persuasive justification for the classification."
Summary of this case from Greene v. TiltonOpinion
05-CV-1790-ST.
March 27, 2008
ANNY MAY STEVENS, #12260204, Snake River Correctional Institution, Ontario, OR, Plaintiff, Pro Se.
HARDY MYERS, Attorney General, LEONARD W. WILLIAMSON, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, OR, Attorneys for Defendants.
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart issued Findings and Recommendation (#38) on February 15, 2008, in which she recommended this Court grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (#33). 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 de novo. Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). See also Lorin Corp. v. Goto Co., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court does not find any error.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation (#38). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (#33).
IT IS SO ORDERED.