More v. Arizona Department of Corrections

D. Arizona

More v. Arizona Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Arizona·Decided January 10, 2020·No. 2:19-cv-04530·Unknown

Opinion

Michael More, No. CV19-4530 PHX DGC Plaintiff, ORDER vs.

Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants. Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to file and serve his lodged proposed Third Amended Complaint. Doc. 21. United States Magistrate Camille D. Bibles has issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the motion be denied. Doc. 27. No objection has been filed, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). The Court will accept the R&R and deny the motion. IT IS ORDERED: 1. The R&R (Doc.27) is accepted. 2. The motion to file and serve the proposed Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 21) is denied. 1 3. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied. Dated this 10th day of January, 2020. . Saul 6 Couple David. Campbell Senior United States District Judge

_2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Michael More, No. CV19-4530 PHX DGC Plaintiff, ORDER vs.

Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants. Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to file and serve his lodged proposed Third Amended Complaint. Doc. 21. United States Magistrate Camille D. Bibles has issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the motion be denied. Doc. 27. No objection has been filed, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). The Court will accept the R&R and deny the motion. IT IS ORDERED: 1. The R&R (Doc.27) is accepted. 2. The motion to file and serve the proposed Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 21) is denied. 1 3. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied. Dated this 10th day of January, 2020. . Saul 6 Couple David. Campbell Senior United States District Judge

_2-

More v. Arizona Department of Corrections, (D. Ariz. 2020).

Pincite

More v. Arizona Department of Corrections (More v. Arizona Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related