From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Renowitzky v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Feb 26, 2018
Case No: C 17-5656 SBA (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2018)

Opinion

Case No: C 17-5656 SBA

02-26-2018

CARL RENOWITZKY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATE OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On January 5, 2018, Magistrate Judge Corley ("Magistrate") issued a Report and Recommendation recommending the Court to dismiss the instant pro se action without prejudice "for failure to prosecute based on Plaintiff's failure to provide a correct mailing address, file a consent/reassignment form, file a case management statement, or appear at the Case Management Conference." Dkt. 7 at 2.

Any objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within fourteen days of receipt thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Civ. L.R. 72-2, 72-3. Three days are added to this deadline where service of the order is by mail. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). The district court 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 judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Civ. L.R. 72-3(a) (requiring that any objections be accompanied by a motion for de novo determination).

The deadline to file an objection to the report and recommendation was January 22, 2018. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1), 6(d), 72(b). To date, no objections have been filed in this case. In the absence of a timely objection, the Court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, advisory committee notes (1983) (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) ("The statute [28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)] makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if [an] objection is made, but not otherwise."). The Court has reviewed the record on its face and finds no clear error. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Docket 7) is ACCEPTED and shall become the Order of this Court. The instant action is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 2/26/18

/s/_________

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

Senior United States District Judge


Summaries of

Renowitzky v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Feb 26, 2018
Case No: C 17-5656 SBA (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2018)
Case details for

Renowitzky v. United States

Case Details

Full title:CARL RENOWITZKY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATE OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Feb 26, 2018

Citations

Case No: C 17-5656 SBA (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2018)