Gastelum v. Glendale, City of ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jorge Gastelum, No. CV-22-01788-PHX-JFM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 City of Glendale, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf. (Doc. 3). On 16 December 20, 2022, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation with this 17 Court.1 (Doc. 14). To date, no objections have been filed. 18 STANDARD OF REVIEW 19 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 20 1 This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court pursuant 21 to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part: 22 When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been assigned pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(a)(1) considers dismissal to be 23 appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent 24 to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge, 25 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee. 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court 27 Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on my behalf: 28 Phoenix/Prescott: Senior United States District Judge Stephen M. McNamee 1 || recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see □□□□□□ □□ 2|| Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the service 3|| of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific written 4|| objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to object to a 5 || Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of 6|| the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those findings on 7\| appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to object to a 8 || Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the propriety of 9|| finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id. 10 DISCUSSION 11 Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no 12 || Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and 13 || adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 14 CONCLUSION 15 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth, 16 IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate || Judge. (Doc. 14). 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing without prejudice this matter. 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to terminate this 20 || matter. 21 Dated this 9th day of January, 2023. 22 23 24 — Lil nora av □□ Hdhorable Stephen M. McNamee 25 Senior United States District Judge 26 27 28 _2-