Opinion
3:23-cr-00111-SLG-KFR-1
10-21-2024
UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES LONEWOLF, Defendant.
ORDER RE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
SHARON L. GLEASON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court at Docket 32 is Defendant Charles Lonewolf's Motion to Dismiss Indictment. The Government responded in opposition at Docket 58. The motion was referred to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Kyle F. Reardon. At Docket 70, Judge Reardon issued his Report and Recommendation, in which he recommended that the motion be denied. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed.
The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). That statute provides that a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”A court is to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge's report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” However, § 636(b)(1) does not “require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”
Id.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).
The magistrate judge recommended that the Court deny the Motion to Dismiss Indictment without prejudice. The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and agrees with its analysis. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, and IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss Indictment at Docket 32 is DENIED without prejudice to refiling it if it becomes appropriate after the en banc decision in Duarte.