Rosario Adolfo Reyes Jauregui v. Department of Homeland Security

Opinion

ROSARIO ADOLFO REYES Case No. SACV 23-1633-MWF (AJR) JAUREGUI, Plaintiff ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT v. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al.,

Defendants.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 26), the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge recommending dismissal of this action with prejudice for failure to state a claim (“Report,” Docket No. 27), Plaintiff’s Objections to the Report (Docket No. 29), and other relevant records on file. Although not required, the Court briefly makes the following observations. See United States v. Ramos, 65 F.4th 427, 434 (9th Cir. 2023) (“the district court ha[s] no obligation to provide individualized analysis of each objection”); Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 (9th Cir. 2005) (affirming a cursory district court order summarily adopting, without addressing any objections, a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation). The Objections are essentially a premature request for discovery. (See, e.g., Docket No. 29 at 2-4). Despite multiple opportunities as detailed in the Report (Docket No. 27 at 2-10), Plaintiff's complaint and amended complaints have not survived screening under Rule 8 of the Federal rules of Civil Procedure. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 686 (2009) (“Because respondent’s complaint is deficient under Rule 8, he is not entitled to discovery, cabined or otherwise.”); Mujica v. AirScan Inc., 771 F.3d 580, 593 (9th Cir. 2014) (“The Supreme Court has stated .. . that plaintiffs must satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8 before the discovery stage, not after it.”). And, notably, Plaintiff seeks no further amendment but instead elects to “maintain[] the allegations in his original complaint” already found deficient (Docket No. 29 at 4). See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962) (leave to amend improper where there has been “repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed’). Accordingly, the Objections are overruled, and the disposition recommended by the Report is accepted in full. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: (1) the Report is ACCEPTED and adopted as the Court’s own findings and conclusions; and (2) judgment shall be entered DISMISSING this action with prejudice for failure to state a claim. pI Dated: September 23, 2024 MICHAEL W. FITZ D i! United States District Judge