Medina v. Thornell

Opinion

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

9 Dominic Alfred Medina, No. CV-24-00097-PHX-MTL

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Ryan Thornell, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael 16 T. Morrissey (“R&R”) (Doc. 9) recommending that the Complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed 17 without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., because Plaintiff has failed to 18 prosecute this action. Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the R&R. The deadline to do 19 so passed fourteen days following service of the R&R, which was mailed to Plaintiff on 20 July 29, 2024. 21 In reviewing an R&R, the Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, 22 the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 23 “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s finding and recommendations de 24 novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 25 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 26 149 (1985) (finding that the District Court need not conduct “any review at all . . . of any 27 issue that is not the subject of an objection”). No objections having been received, the Court 28 will accept and adopt the R&R in its entirety. 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9) is accepted. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint (Doc. 1) is dismissed without 4|| prejudice. 5 IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment 6 || accordingly and close this case. 7 Dated this 22nd day of August, 2024. 8 ° Wichal T. Hburde 10 Michael T. Liburdi 11 United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-