James v. Emmens et al

Filing 165

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 142 ) is Adopted in its entirety. It is further Ordered that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 101 ) is Granted. Plaintiff's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 116 ) is Denied. This case is dismissed. The Clerk is ordered to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff and to close the case. Signed by Judge William Q. Hayes on 01/29/2019. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(ajs)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KYLE ROBERT JAMES,

Case No. 16cv2823-WQH-NLS

12
13
14

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

ORDER

DEPUTY EMMENS, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

Plaintiff,

v.

HAYES, Judge:
The matter before the Court is the review of the Report and Recommendation
issued by United States Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes (ECF No. 142)
recommending that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 101) be
granted and Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 116) be denied.
The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation
of a magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28
U.S.C. § 636(b). The district judge must “make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report . . . to which objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The district court need not review de novo those portions of a
Report and Recommendation to which neither party objects. See Wang v. Masaitis, 416
F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121
-1-

16cv2823-WQH-NLS

1 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“Neither the Constitution nor the [Federal Magistrates Act]
2 requires a district judge to review, de novo, findings and recommendations that the
3 parties themselves accept as correct.”).
4

No party has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation. The Court

5 has reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record, and the submissions of the
6 parties.
7

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 142)

8 is adopted in its entirety. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for
9 Summary Judgment (ECF No. 101) is Granted. Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary
10 Judgment (ECF No. 116) is denied. This case is dismissed. The Clerk is ordered to
11 enter judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff and to close the case.
12 DATED: January 29, 2019
13
14

WILLIAM Q. HAYES
United States District Judge

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

16cv2823-WQH-NLS