Opinion
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND (3) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
JANIS L. SAMMARTINO, District Judge.
Presently before the Court are Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 43) Defendant's motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 111) and Magistrate Judge Porter's Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant Defendant's motion and deny Plaintiff's motion. (Doc. No. 129.)
Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth the duties of a district court in connection with a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. "The district court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the report... to which objection is made," and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(c); see also United States v. Remsing , 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989); United States v. Raddatz , 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980). However, in the absence of timely objection, the Court need "only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court , 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).
In this case, Plaintiff has failed to timely file objections to Magistrate Judge Porter's R&R. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds that it is thorough, well reasoned, and no contains no clear error. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the R&R in full. The Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Porter's Report and Recommendation, (2) DENIES Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and (3) GRANTS Defendant's motion for summary judgment. This order concludes the litigation in this case. The Clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.