Harris v. Thomas

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

9 Deyoe Royal Harris, No. CV-23-00072-TUC-RCC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Sidney R Thomas, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 On June 21, 2023, Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in which he recommended the Court dismiss Plaintiff Deyoe Royal Harris's Complaint and denied any remaining motions as moot. (Doc. 12.) Judge Macdonald notified the parties they had fourteen (14) days from the date of the R&R to file any objections. (Id. at 13.) No objections have been filed.

20 If neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s R&R, the District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge’s decision under any specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, the statute for review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.”

25 Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

26 The Court has reviewed the Complaint (Doc. 1), the Motion for Status Conference (Doc. 11), and the R&R (Doc. 12). The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Macdonald's conclusions.

1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 2 1) Magistrate Judge Macdonald's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (Doc.

3 12.)

4 2) Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (Doc. 1.)

5 3) Plaintiff's Motion for Status Conference is DENIED AS MOOT. (Doc. 11.)

6 4) This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court shall 7 docket accordingly.

8 Dated this 10th day of July, 2023.

1 fl Dp 12 □ f KW Cabl.— Honorable Raner ©. Collins 13 Senior United States District Judge _2-