Odigwe et al v. Social Security Administration et al
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)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Uzoma Odigwe, et al.,
Social Security Administration, et al.,
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Complaint against the Social Security
Administration (“SSA”), the Federal Protective Service, and AKAL Security Company
alleging race discrimination and retaliation. (Doc. 1), United States Magistrate Judge
Duncan’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) and Plaintiffs’ Objections to the
Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 7).
At the time of Magistrate Judge Duncan’s issuance of the Report and
Recommendation the case was assigned to him.
Recommendation was addressed to the Presiding Judge of the Phoenix Division because
a Magistrate Judge does not have the authority to take dispositive action in a case absent
the full consent of the parties. Thereafter, one of the parties’ elected assignment of the
case to district judge jurisdiction and the case was reassigned to the undersigned.
Judge Duncan’s Report and
The Court has considered Plaintiffs’ objections and reviewed the Report and
Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that
the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and
Recommendation to which specific objections are made).
The Court accepts the
magistrate judge’s recommended disposition within the meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed. R.
Civ. P., and overrules Plaintiffs’ objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the
district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate”).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of
Magistrate Judge Duncan (Doc. 4) 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.
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.
Neil V. Wake
United States District Judge
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?