Harb v. Penzone

1 WO 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Ronnie Hassan Harb, No. CV-21-01032-PHX-MTL (ESW) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. NOT FOR PUBLICATION Paul Penzone, 13 Defendant.

15 Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 19), recommending that the Court deny Plaintiff Ronnie Hassan Harb’s Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. 14). (Doc. 19.) Neither party has filed objections to the R & R, and the time to do so has passed.

19 In reviewing an R & R, this Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna- Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts need not conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”). No objections having been received, the Court will accept and adopt the R & R. 27 Based on the foregoing, /// 1 IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett’s Report and 2|| Recommendation (Doc. 19) is accepted. The Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. 14) is denied.

4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion for Leave to File Supplemental || Pleading (Doc. 27) and Motion for Leave to File Second Supplemental Pleading (Doc. 30).

6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion to Strike (Doc. 38) as moot.

7 Dated this 10th day of March, 2022.

Wichal T. Fburde ? Michael T. Liburdi 10 United States District Judge _2-