Opinion
No. CV-17-03028-PHX-JAT
07-27-2018
Eloy Vargas, Plaintiff, v. Yuma County Detention Center, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
On July 10, 2018, the Magistrate Judge to whom this case was assigned issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) recommending that this case be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. (Doc. 21). Neither party has filed objections to the R&R.
This Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). It is "clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) ("Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, 'but not otherwise.'"); Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 589 F.3d 1027, 1032 (9th Cir. 2009) (the district court "must review de novo the portions of the [Magistrate Judge's] recommendations to which the parties object."). District courts are 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) (emphasis added); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made.").
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is accepted. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 14) is denied as moot.
Dated this 27th day of July, 2018.
/s/_________
James A. Teilborg
Senior United States District Judge