Romero #97953 v. Corizon Health et al

Filing 156

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re: 139 Report and Recommendation. Defendants Metcalf and Garrison are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 1/22/18. (DXD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Kevin Sean Romero,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-15-00285-PHX-DJH (BSB)

Corizon Health, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

16

issued by United States Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade on December 13, 2017. (Doc.

17

139). In the R&R, Judge Bade screened the Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 54) and

18

recommends that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Metcalf and Garrison be

19

dismissed without prejudice, because the service deadline had passed and Plaintiff had

20

neither served these Defendants or obtained waivers of service from them. Additionally,

21

on December 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed a response with the Court stating that he “has no

22

objection to the dismissal of these two (2) Defendants.” (Doc. 133).

23

Judge Bade advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections and

24

that the failure to file timely objections “may result in the acceptance of the Report and

25

Recommendation by the District Court without further review.” (Doc. 139 at 3)(citing

26

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). No objections have

27

been filed and the time to do so has expired. Absent any objections, the Court is not

28

required to review the findings and recommendations in the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn,

1

474 U.S. 140, 149 (1989) (The relevant provision of the Federal Magistrates Act, 28

2

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “does not on its face require any review at all . . . of any issue that

3

is not the subject of an objection.”); Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121 (same); Fed.R.Civ.P.

4

72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s

5

disposition that has been properly objected to.”).

6

Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with its findings and

7

recommendations. The Court will, therefore, accept the R&R and adopt Judge Bade’s

8

recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court may accept,

9

reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the

10

magistrate judge.”); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (same).

11

Accordingly,

12

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Bade’s R&R (Doc. 139) is accepted and

13
14
15
16

adopted as the order of this Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Metcalf and Garrison are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Dated this 22nd day of January, 2018.

17
18
19
20

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-