Opinion
Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-152.
January 22, 2008
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before the Court for consideration of two Reports and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull [Doc. No. 9 and 10] dated December 5, 2007, and December 11, 2007, respectively, to which neither party filed objections. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, failure to file objections to the magistrate judge's proposed findings and recommendation permits the District Court to review the recommendation under the standards that the District Court believes are appropriate, and under these circumstances, the parties' right to de novo review is waived. See Webb v. Califano , 468 F. Supp. 825 (E.D. Cal. 1979).
Accordingly, because no objections have been filed, this report and recommendation ("R R") will be reviewed for clear error. Upon review of the two R R's and the record, it is the opinion of this Court that the Magistrate Judge's Reports and Recommendations [Doc. No. 9 and 10] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED.
For reasons more fully stated in the Reports and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull [Doc. No. 9 and 10], this Court ORDERS that plaintiff's Application for Leave to Proceed Without the Prepayment of Fees [Doc. No. 6] is DENIED, and the petitioner's Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus [Doc. No. 1] is DENIED and this case is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit true copies of this Order to all counsel of record.