Opinion
CASE NO. 14-cv-1923-WQH-WVG
08-13-2018
ANDREW CEJAS, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL PARAMO, Warden, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
:
The matter before the Court is the review of the Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge recommending that the motion for preliminary injunction filed by Plaintiff (ECF No. 46) be denied. (ECF No. 73).
The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The district judge 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). The district court need not review de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which neither party objects. See Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) ("Neither the Constitution nor the [Federal Magistrates Act] requires a district judge to review, de novo, findings and recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct.").
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record, and the submissions of the parties. No objections have been filed. The Court adopts the Report and in its entirety.
III. Conclusion
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 73) is adopted in its entirety. The motion for preliminary injunction (ECF No. 46) is denied. DATED: August 13, 2018
/s/_________
WILLIAM Q. HAYES
United States District Judge