Garcia #199037 v. Corizon Health Services et al

Filing 21

ORDER that Magistrate Judge Metcalf's 15 R&R is accepted and adopted as the order of this Court. ORDERED that Counts Two, Three, and Four of the First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ORDERED that Defendants Ryan, Pratt , Mendoza and Thomas are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Corizon Health Services must respond to Count One of the First Amended Complaint within 14 days of the date of this Order. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 10/19/2017. (LFIG)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Alfredo Garcia,

No. CV-16-4569-PHX-DJH (JFM)
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Corizon Health Services, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation re Screening

16

of First Amended Complaint (“R&R”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge James F.

17

Metcalf on July 13, 2017. (Doc. 15). In the R&R, Judge Metcalf screened the First

18

Amended Complaint (Doc. 14) and recommends that Counts Two, Three, and Four be

19

dismissed without prejudice after finding that Counts Two and Three are duplicative of

20

Count One and that Count Four fails to state a claim for relief. He further recommends

21

that Defendants Ryan, Pratt, Mendoza and Thomas be dismissed without prejudice.

22

Based on Judge Metcalf’s recommendations, Count One against Defendant Corizon

23

Health Services would be the only remaining claim and defendant in this action.

24

Judge Metcalf advised the parties that the parties had fourteen days to file

25

objections and that the failure to file timely objections "will be considered a waiver of a

26

party’s right to de novo consideration of the issues.” (Doc. 15 at 9) (citing United States

27

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

28

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

1

to review the findings and recommendations in the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S.

2

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

3

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

4

subject of an objection.”); Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121 (same); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3)

5

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

6

disposition that has been properly objected to.”).

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

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

12

Accordingly,

13

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Metcalf’s R&R (Doc. 15) is accepted

14
15
16
17
18

and adopted as the order of this Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counts Two, Three, and Four of the First
Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Ryan, Pratt, Mendoza and
Thomas are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

19

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Defendant Corizon Health Services must

20

respond to Count One of the First Amended Complaint within 14 days of the date of this

21

Order. (See Doc. 18 at 2).

22

Dated this 19th day of October, 2017.

23
24
25
26

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
United States District Judge

27
28

-2-