Rivera v. Uribe et al

Filing 14

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 13 , ORDER OF DISMISSAL. This action is dismissed without leave to amend. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 3/5/12.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kaj)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICARDO RIVERA,

12

CASE NO. 10cv2245-LAB (BGS)
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION; AND

vs.
13

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
14
15

D. URIBE, Warden, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Ricardo Rivera filed his complaint on October 28, 2010, bringing claims under

18

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants then moved to dismiss, and their motion was referred to

19

Magistrate Judge Bernard Skomal for report and recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 636. On February 7, 2012, Judge Skomal issued his report and recommendation (the

21

“R&R”), recommending that the complaint be dismissed without leave to amend, because

22

Rivera had not exhausted his administrative remedies and it was too late for him to do so.

23

The R&R also recommended declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Rivera’s

24

state law claims, since his federal claims would be dismissed. The R&R required any party

25

wishing to object to file objections within seventeen days of being served with the R&R.

26

Since then, no objections have been filed.

27

A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and

28

recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). "The district judge must
-1-

10cv2245

1

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly

2

objected to." Id. "A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the

3

findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). When,

4

as here, no objections are filed, the Court need not review de novo the Report and

5

Recommendation. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005).

6

The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds it to be correct. Because neither party

7

objects to it, the Court ADOPTS it. This action is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE

8

TO AMEND.

9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 5, 2012

12
13

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

10cv2245