Kastigar v. Mercedes-Benz USA LLC

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: July 1, 2022
• Docket: 4:21-cv-00501
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Richard J Kastigar, Jr., et al., No. CV-21-00501-TUC-RM (DTF)

10 Plaintiffs, ORDER

11 v.

12 Mercedes-Benz USA LLC, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 On April 14, 2022, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro issued a Report and 16 Recommendation (Doc. 43) recommending that this Court grant Defendant Mercedes- 17 Benz Research & Development North America’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal 18 Jurisdiction (Doc. 24). No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed. 19 A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a 20 magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which 21 objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule 22 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is 23 filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record 24 in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 25 advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 26 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the 27 district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan, 28 CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for 1 || clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation). 2 The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Ferraro’s Report and Recommendation, || the parties’ briefs, and the record. The Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Ferraro’s 4|| Report and Recommendation. 5 Accordingly, 6 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 43) is accepted and adopted in full. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Mercedes-Benz Research & Development North America’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Doc. 24) is granted. Defendant Mercedes-Benz Research & Development North America 1s 11 || dismissed without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction. 12 Dated this 30th day of June, 2022. 13 14 piles □□ 16 ANGUL Bf Honorable Rostsiary □□□□□□□ 17 United States District □□□□□ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-