Opinion
3:22-cv-00979-YY
07-26-2022
MICHAEL SWANSON, Plaintiff, v. CONGRESS, PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN, NANCY PELOSI, MARK TAKANO, and MIKE LEVIN, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN Senior United States District Judge
On July 8, 2022, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”) [ECF 5], recommending that I dismiss Plaintiff Michael Swanson's claims with prejudice for failing to cite a valid claim for relief. Objections were due July 22, 2022, but none were filed. Upon review, I agree with Judge You.
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
CONCLUSION
Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [ECF 5] as my own opinion. I DISMISS Plaintiffs claims with prejudice for failure to state a claim.
IT IS SO ORDERED.