Joseph Rose v. Slater, Slater & Schulman, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH ROSE, Case No. 2:25-06112 CV (ADS) Plaintiff, ORDER ACCEPTING UNITED 14 STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION SLATER, SLATER & SCHULMAN, [DOC. # 62] et al., Defendants.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. # 1), the First Amended Complaint (Doc. # 17), the Motion to Dismiss (Doc.

22 # 34), Plaintiff’s Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. ## 43, 47), the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 62, “R&R”), Plaintiff’s Objections to the R&R and other documents Plaintiff has filed regarding the R&R (Doc. ## 66–70,72–76), Defendant’s opposition to Plaintiff’s objections to the R&R (Doc. # 77), and the full record in the case.1 The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the R&R to which objections were made and hereby OVERRULES the objections. The Court notes that Plaintiff’s various challenges to the magistrate judge’s involvement in this case are without merit. He identifies no basis for recusal or disqualification under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 or 455, which require an extrajudicial source of bias such that a reasonable person would question the judge’s impartiality; adverse or even repeated judicial rulings are insufficient as a matter of law. United States v. Hernandez, 109 F.3d 1450, 1453–54 (9th Cir. 1997); Liteky v. United States, 510 14 U.S. 540, 554–55 (1994). Nor does Plaintiff’s refusal to consent have any bearing on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, as referrals under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) do not require party consent. Holder v. Holder, 392 F.3d 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. 2004); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(expressly providing for a recommended disposition “without the parties’ consent”).

1Plaintiff’s deadline to object to the R&R was December 3, 2025. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.

Since that time, and without leave of the Court, Plaintiff has filed several additional requests, notices, and responses related to the R&R that amount to additional objections. Doc. ## 79-80, 82-88, 90-91, 93. These are untimely and improper, and the Court therefore STRIKES them from the record.

1 Accordingly, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, and ORDERS as follows: 4 1. The Report and Recommendation is accepted (Doc. # 62); 5 2. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend; 6 3. Judgment is to be entered accordingly; and ; 4. All other pending matters are TERMINATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10 □ Carat a Valenzusla |! Dated: January 7, 2026 HON. CYNTHIA VALENZUELA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE