Crump v. Sanchez et al

Filing 75

ORDER Adopting 64 Report and Recommendation. The Court Grants Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; and Denies Plaintiff;s motion to amend the petition. The Clerk of the Court shall entered judgment in favor of Defendants and close the case. Signed by Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo on 6/1/15. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

Case No.: 14cv1296-CAB (BLM)

STEVE CRUMP,
Plaintiff,

11

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

vs.
12
13
14

CAPTAIN S. SANCHEZ; DR.
WILLIAMS; OFFICER R. DAVIS;
and, A. NANQUIL,
Defendant.

[Doc. No. 64]

15
16

Plaintiff Steve Crump is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

17

pauperis in this civil rights case brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 4, 2014,

18

Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. [Doc. No. 10.] On August 11, 2014,

19

Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed “as to the retaliation claims only” as described

20

in his FAC. [Doc. No. 21.] On August 25, 2014, this Court granted Plaintiff’s
1
14cv1296-CAB (BLM)

1

motion to proceed on the retaliation claims and dismissed all other claims

2

contained in the FAC. [Doc. No. 24.]

3

On December 19, 2014, Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment

4

for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies (“MSJ”). [Doc. No. 30.] Plaintiff

5

filed oppositions on December 24, 2014, January 6, 2015, and January 22, 2015.

6

[Doc. Nos. 32, 34 & 37.] On February 4, 2015, Plaintiff also filed documents to

7

support his position that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. [Doc. No.

8

44.] In addition, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint on

9

January 21, 2015. [Doc. No. 36.] Defendants file a reply on February 11, 2015.

10

[Doc. No. 45.] On April 2, 2015, Magistrate Judge Major prepared a Report and

11

Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Motion for Summary Judgment

12

be granted; and that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint be

13

denied. To date, no objections have been filed, nor have there been any requests

14

for an extension of time in which to file objections.

15

A district judge’s duties concerning a magistrate judge’s R&R and a

16

respondent’s objections thereto are set forth in Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of

17

Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). When no objections are filed, the

18

district judge is not required to review the magistrate judge’s R&R. The Court

19

reviews de novo those portions of the R&R to which objections are made. 28

20

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part,
2
14cv1296-CAB (BLM)

1

the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id. However,

2

“[t]he statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate

3

judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not

4

otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc)

5

(emphasis in original). “Neither the Constitution nor the statute requires a district

6

judge to review, de novo, findings and recommendations that the parties

7

themselves accept as correct.” Id. In the absence of timely objection, the Court

8

“need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order

9

to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note

10

(citing Campbel v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).
Here, neither party has timely filed objections to the R&R. Having reviewed

11
12

the R&R, the Court finds that it is thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear

13

error. Accordingly, the Court hereby (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Major’s

14

Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 64]; (2) GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for

15

Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 [Doc. No. 30]; and (3) DENIES

16

Plaintiff’s motion to amend the petition [Doc. No. 36].

17

////

18

////

19

////

20

////
3
14cv1296-CAB (BLM)

1
2
3
4

The Clerk of the Court shall entered judgment in favor of Defendants and
close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 1, 2015

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
4
14cv1296-CAB (BLM)