Shabie v. Ryan et al

Filing 60

ORDER that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, (Doc. 54 ), is ADOPTED AND ACCEPTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Paula Carpenter are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; Defendant Paula Carpenter is dismissed. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 3/31/2015. (KMG)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Philbert Shabie, No. CV-12-02053-PHX-JAT Plaintiff, 10 11 v. 12 ORDER Charles L. Ryan, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation from the Magistrate 18 Judge (“R&R”), (Doc. 54), recommending that this case be dismissed as to Defendant 19 Paula Carpenter for Plaintiff’s failure to serve that defendant. 20 Neither party filed objections to the R&R.1 Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts 21 the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are 22 not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 23 objection” (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 24 Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the 25 26 27 28 1 Subsequent to issuing the R&R, the Magistrate Judge issued an order to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed entirely for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. (Doc. 56). Defendant responded to the order to the show cause. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court reviewed Plaintiff’s response to the order to show cause to ensure it did not contain objections to the R&R. The response makes no mention of the R&R, its reasoning, or Plaintiff’s failure to serve Defendant Carpenter. 1 magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 2 otherwise” (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 3 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003). 4 The Court emphasizes that the R&R only recommends dismissing Plaintiff’s 5 claims against Defendant Carpenter, and therefore does not affect Plaintiff’s claims 6 against the remaining Defendants. 7 Therefore, 8 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, 9 (Doc. 54), is ADOPTED AND ACCEPTED; 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Paula 11 Carpenter are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; Defendant Paula Carpenter is 12 dismissed. 13 Dated this 31st day of March, 2015. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?