Opinion
Case No. 2:15-cr-00285-APG-PAL
04-05-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BENJAMIN GALECKI, Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORTS OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO SUPPRESS
(ECF Nos. 43, 44, 79, 80)
On June 22, 2016, defendant Benjamin Galecki filed a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 43) and a Motion to Suppress Evidence (ECF No. 44). On September 19, 2016, Magistrate Judge Leen entered her Reports of Findings and Recommendation (ECF Nos. 79, 80) recommending that both motions be denied. No objections have been filed to those Reports. Thus, I am not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Ninth Circuit has confirmed that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objection has been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ("[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise."); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (Based on Thomas and Reyna-Tapia, "district courts are not required to conduct any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection."). Because there is no objection to Judge Leen's recommendation, I may accept the recommendations without review. Therefore, //// //// //// ////
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Leen's Reports of Findings and Recommendation (ECF Nos. 79, 80) are accepted and approved in their entirety. Defendant Galecki's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 43) is DENIED and his Motion to Suppress Evidence (ECF No. 44) is DENIED.
Dated: April 5, 2017.
/s/_________
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE