Nez v. Advanced Correctional Healthcare Incorporated

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

9 Catherine Nez, No. CV-23-08010-PCT-KML (JFM) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Advanced Correctional Healthcare Incorporated, et al., Defendants.

15 On January 6, 2025, Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf issued a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 156.) No objections were filed. A district judge “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). The district court must review de novo the portions to which an objection is made. Id. The district court need not, however, review the portions to which no objection is made. See Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. 21 Ariz. 2003) (“[D]e novo review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, but not otherwise.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted). Because no objections were filed, the Report and Recommendation is adopted in full.

24 IT IS ORDERED the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 156) is ADOPTED.

25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows: 26 1) Naomi Nez is DISMISSED as limited intervenor in this action; 27 2) Naomi Nez is REMOVED as next friend for minors N.N. and B.T.N.; 28 and 1 3) Minors N.N. and B.T.N. are DISMISSED as limited intervenors.

2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion to Expedite (Doc. 163) is GRANTED.

3 Dated this 5th day of February, 2025.

WW pda M. VARA Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 7 United States District Judge _2-