From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Romero

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Jan 3, 2023
No. CV-22-00548-TUC-EJM (D. Ariz. Jan. 3, 2023)

Opinion

CV-22-00548-TUC-EJM

01-03-2023

Deyoe R Harris, Plaintiff, v. Viola Romero, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Honorable Raner C. Collins Senior United States District Judge

On December 13, 2022, Magistrate Judge Eric J. Markovich issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in which he recommended the Court grant Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Doc. 2) and dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice (Doc. 1). (Doc. 7.) Judge Markovich notified the parties that they had fourteen (14) days from the date of the R&R to file any objections. (Id. at 4.) To date, no objections have been filed.

It appears Plaintiff has continued to e-mail Judge Markovich regarding this matter. (Docs. 8-9, 11.) Plaintiff has been repeatedly advised that this is inappropriate. (Docs. 89, 11.) Plaintiff has been referred to the appropriate rules. (Docs. 8-9, 11.) Nonetheless, none of Plaintiff's e-mails contain objections to Judge Markovich's R&R even if the Court were able to construe Plaintiff's communications as a proper objection.

If neither party objects to a magistrate judge's R&R, the District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge's decision under any specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, the statute for review of a magistrate judge's recommendation “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

Pursuant to General Order 21-25, the Court has reviewed the Complaint (Doc. 1), the Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2), and Judge Markovich's R&R (Doc. 7). The Court finds the R&R is well reasoned and agrees with Judge Markovich's conclusions.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:

1) Magistrate Judge Markovich's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (Doc.7.)

2) Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs is GRANTED. (Doc. 2.)

3) Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Doc. 1.) The Clerk of Court shall docket accordingly.


Summaries of

Harris v. Romero

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Jan 3, 2023
No. CV-22-00548-TUC-EJM (D. Ariz. Jan. 3, 2023)
Case details for

Harris v. Romero

Case Details

Full title:Deyoe R Harris, Plaintiff, v. Viola Romero, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Arizona

Date published: Jan 3, 2023

Citations

No. CV-22-00548-TUC-EJM (D. Ariz. Jan. 3, 2023)