Tillman v. Archie

Filing 16

ORDER by Judge ARMSTRONG adopting Report and Recommendations as to 10 Report and Recommendations. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 OAKLAND DIVISION 6 7 TINA TILLMAN, Case No: C 13-00359 SBA 8 Plaintiff, 9 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION vs. Docket 10 10 DARRYL ARCHIE, 11 Defendant. 12 13 On March 25, 2013, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley ("the Magistrate") 14 issued a Report and Recommendation in which she recommends that this action be 15 dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Dkt. 10. The Report and 16 Recommendation states that "[a]s Plaintiff has neither consented to nor declined the 17 undersigned magistrate judge's jurisdiction, the Clerk of the Court is ordered to reassign 18 this action to a district court judge." Id. On March 26, 2013, this case was reassigned to 19 the undersigned. Dkt. 11. 20 Any objections to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation were required to be 21 filed within fourteen days of service thereof. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 22 636(b)(1)(C). The district court must "make a de novo determination of those portions of 23 the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made," 24 and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations 25 made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 26 The deadline to object to the Report and Recommendation was April 8, 2013. See 27 Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). To date, no 28 objections have been filed. In the absence of a timely objection, the Court "need only 1 satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the 2 recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (citing Campbell v. 3 U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 4 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) ("The statute [28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)] makes it clear 5 that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de 6 novo if [an] objection is made, but not otherwise.") (en banc). The Court has reviewed the 7 record on its face and finds no clear error. Accordingly, 8 9 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 10) is ACCEPTED and shall become the Order of this Court. This action is 10 DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk shall close the file and 11 terminate any pending matters. 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 4/22/13 _______________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 TINA TILLMAN et al, 5 Plaintiff, 6 7 8 v. DARRYL ARCHIE et al, Defendant. / 9 10 Case Number: CV13-00359 SBA 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 12 13 14 15 16 17 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on April 22, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 18 19 21 Tina Tillman 1502 Bissell Ave Richmond, CA 94801 22 Dated: April 22, 2013 20 23 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Lisa Clark, Deputy Clerk- 24 25 26 27 28 -3-

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?