Medina v. Thornell

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

9 Dominic Alfred Medina, No. CV-24-00097-PHX-MTL 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Ryan Thornell, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Michael T. Morrissey (“R&R”) (Doc. 9) recommending that the Complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this action. Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the R&R. The deadline to do so passed fourteen days following service of the R&R, which was mailed to Plaintiff on July 29, 2024.

21 In reviewing an R&R, the 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)(C).

23 “[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s finding 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 the District Court 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 in its entirety.

1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9) is accepted.

3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Complaint (Doc. 1) is dismissed without 4|| prejudice.

5 IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment || accordingly and close this case.

7 Dated this 22nd day of August, 2024. ° Wichal T. Hburde 10 Michael T. Liburdi 11 United States District Judge _2-