Tron-Haukebo v. Clallam County

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA ANDERS TRON-HAUKEBO, CASE NO. C23-5521 BHS Plaintiff, ORDER 9 v. CLALLAM COUNTY, 11 Defendant.

13 This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Grady J. Leupold’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), Dkt. 13, recommending the Court deny pro se plaintiff Anders Tron-Haukebo’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, Dkt. 4, and dismiss this matter without prejudice and without leave to further amend. Tron-Haukebo sought an extension of time to respond to the R&R, Dkt. 14, and the Court granted that request, Dkt. 15. Any such response was due September 29, 2023. Tron-Haukebo did not object to the R&R. 20 A district court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed finding or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 22 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (emphasis added); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). “The statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings 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). A proper objection requires “specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations” in the R&R. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).

6 Tron-Haukebo has not objected to the R&R. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED. Tron-Haukebo’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED, and this matter is DISMISSED without prejudice and without leave to amend.

10 The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case.

11 IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 Dated this 3rd day of October, 2023.

A BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge