Cross v. Empressive Candles LLC et al

Filing 84

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS ORDERED that the 80 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in full. IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's 75 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: the Motion is granted as to Plaintiff's claim that Defendant is jointly and severally liable and denied as to Plaintiff's strict-liability claim. Signed by Judge Rosemary Marquez on 7/29/22. (BAC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Johnathon Cross,
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

Empressive Candles LLC, et al.,

13

No. CV-20-00423-TUC-RM (MSA)
ORDER

Defendants.

14
15

On July 5, 2022, Magistrate Judge Maria S. Aguilera issued a Report and

16

Recommendation (Doc. 80) recommending that this Court grant Defendant’s Motion for

17

Summary Judgment (Doc. 75) on Plaintiff’s claim that Defendant is jointly and severally

18

liable and deny Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s strict-liability

19

claim. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed.

20

A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a

21

magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which

22

objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule

23

72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is

24

filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record

25

in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)

26

advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170

27

F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the

28

district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan,

1

CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for

2

clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation).

3

The

Court

has

reviewed

Magistrate

Judge

4

Recommendation, the parties’ briefs, and the record.

5

Magistrate Judge Aguilera’s Report and Recommendation.

Aguilera’s

Report

and

The Court finds no error in

6

Accordingly,

7

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 80) is accepted

8

and adopted in full.

9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

10

(Doc. 75) is granted in part as denied in part as follows: the Motion is granted as to

11

Plaintiff’s claim that Defendant is jointly and severally liable and denied as to Plaintiff’s

12

strict-liability claim.

13

Dated this 29th day of July, 2022.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-