Jackson v. Phoenix, City of

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

9 Aaron Jackson, No. CV-22-00953-PHX-SMB (ASB) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. City of Phoenix, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 United States Magistrate Judge Alison Bachus has issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Time for Service of the Third Amended Complaint on Officer Gomez (Doc. 63) be denied. (Doc.

18 67) The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (R&R at 5) (citing Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) No objection has been filed, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3);Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

23 Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the pleadings and agrees with the analysis of Magistrate Judge Bachus. The Court will accept and adopt the R&R. 25 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 67) is accepted and Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 63) is denied.

27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Gomez be dismissed from this case without prejudice for lack of service.

1 Dated this 17th day of January, 2024.

2 —— > 4 Aonorable Susan M; Brnovich 5 United States District Judge _2-