Odigwe et al v. Social Security Administration et al

Filing 8

ORDER - The 4 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Duncan to dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint because amendment would appear to be futile in light of any possible consideration of the facts which Plaintiffs have asserted and the applicable law. Plaintiffs' Complaint is dismissed. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate this action. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 09/04/2015. (ATD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Uzoma Odigwe, et al.,

No. CV-15-1497-PHX-NVW

Plaintiffs,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Social Security Administration, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14

Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Complaint against the Social Security

15

Administration (“SSA”), the Federal Protective Service, and AKAL Security Company

16

alleging race discrimination and retaliation. (Doc. 1), United States Magistrate Judge

17

Duncan’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) and Plaintiffs’ Objections to the

18

Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 7).

19

At the time of Magistrate Judge Duncan’s issuance of the Report and

20

Recommendation the case was assigned to him.

21

Recommendation was addressed to the Presiding Judge of the Phoenix Division because

22

a Magistrate Judge does not have the authority to take dispositive action in a case absent

23

the full consent of the parties. Thereafter, one of the parties’ elected assignment of the

24

case to district judge jurisdiction and the case was reassigned to the undersigned.

Judge Duncan’s Report and

25

The Court has considered Plaintiffs’ objections and reviewed the Report and

26

Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that

27

the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and

28

Recommendation to which specific objections are made).

The Court accepts the

1

magistrate judge’s recommended disposition within the meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed. R.

2

Civ. P., and overrules Plaintiffs’ objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the

3

district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

4

recommendations made by the magistrate”).

5

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of

6

Magistrate Judge Duncan (Doc. 4) to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint because amendment

7

would appear to be futile in light of any possible consideration of the facts which

8

Plaintiffs have asserted and the applicable law.

9
10
11
12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Complaint is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment
accordingly and terminate this action.
Dated this 4th day of September, 2015.

13
14

Neil V. Wake
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-