Navarro v. Utah Department of Child and Family Services

Opinion

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH

SARA NAVARRO and JOHN BATES, ORDER ADOPTING [8] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:25-cv-00647-DBB-DBP v. District Judge David Barlow UTAH DEPARTMENT OF CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Defendant.

The Report and Recommendation1 issued by United States Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on August 27, 2025, recommends that the court dismiss with prejudice Plaintiffs’ Complaint2 and deny Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis.3 Judge Pead notes that the Complaint fails to state a claim because it only asserts allegations against a government entity that is immune from liability under the Eleventh Amendment.4 The magistrate judge advised Plaintiffs of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen days of its service.5 Plaintiffs did not file an objection.6 Because Plaintiffs filed no objection, the court reviews the Report and Recommendation for clear error.7 Having done so,

1 Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), ECF No. 8, Issued Aug. 27, 2025. 2 Complaint, ECF No. 1, Filed Aug. 5, 2025. 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, Filed Aug. 5, 2025. 4 R&R 6. 5 Id. at 7. 6 See Docket. 7 Johnson v. Progressive Leasing, No. 222CV00052RJSCMR, 2023 WL 4044514, at *2 (D. Utah June 16, 2023), appeal dismissed, No. 23-4090, 2023 WL 9062281 (10th Cir. July 26, 2023) (“De novo review is applicable only when a party files an objection within fourteen days of service that sufficiently directs the district court’s attention to the factual and legal issues in dispute. . . . This court generally reviews unobjected-to portions of a report and recommendation for clear error.”); United States v. 2121 E. 30th Street, 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996) (“[A] the court finds that the magistrate judge’s analysis and conclusions are sound, that no clear error appears on the face of the record, and that amendment would be futile. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the [8] Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. Plaintiffs’ action is DISMISSED with prejudice.

Signed September 23, 2025. BY THE COURT

David Barlow United States District Judge

party’s objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation must be both timely and specific to preserve an issue for de novo review by the district court or for appellate review.”).