UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 11, 2012
A. DE LA TRINIDAD ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Janis L. Sammartino United States District Judge
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; (2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF Nos. 8, 18)
Presently before the Court are Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) and Magistrate Judge Lewis's report and recommendation, which advises that the Court grant Defendants' motion (ECF No. 18).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district court's duties in connection with a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district court 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 judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 673--76 (1980); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of timely objection, the Court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).
Here, Plaintiff has failed to timely file objections to Magistrate Judge Lewis's report and recommendation. Having reviewed the report and recommendation, the Court finds that it is thorough, well reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the Court hereby (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Lewis's report and recommendation, (2) GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss. All of Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Gonzalez and Chavez, as well as Plaintiff's negligence claim against Defendant Diaz, are dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.