Kirkwood v. Penzone

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

9 Manuel Jay Kirkwood, No. CV-21-00856-PHX-MTL 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Paul Penzone, et al., 13 Defendants.

14 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle (Doc. 20) recommending that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) and this action be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court’s rules and orders and that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 16) and Motion for Stay of Discovery Deadlines (Doc. 17) be denied as moot.

19 Neither party filed objections to the R&R. The Court is therefore not obligated to review the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“[28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)] makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise”). Even so, the Court has reviewed Judge Boyle’s R&R and adopts it.

27 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Complaint and this action will be dismissed without prejudice.

1| ITIS ORDERED: 2 (1) The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is accepted and adopted.

4 (2) Pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this action is dismissed without prejudice.

6 (3) Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 16) and Motion for Stay of Discovery Deadlines (Doc. 17) are denied as moot.

8 (4) The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action.

10 Dated this 5th day of April, 2022.

WMichak T. dihurdle 13 Michael T. Liburdi 14 United States District Judge _2-