Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03664/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03664-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Johnny Angel Pacheco, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph Arpaio, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.05-3664-PHX-ROS

ORDER

On November 15, 2005 Plaintiff, who was at that time incarcerated at the Durango

Jail, filed the instant civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1). On April 12,

2006, Magistrate Judge Edmonds issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R")

recommending that the Complaint be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure (Doc. #6). No objections were filed by either party.

The Court "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). It is "clear that the

district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if

objection is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

1126 (D. Ariz. 2003) ("Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of

factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, 'but not otherwise."'). District

Case 2:05-cv-03664-ROS-GEE Document 7 Filed 06/16/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

courts are not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject

of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). No objection having been

made, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. #6) is ADOPTED and

this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

DATED this 15th day of June, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-03664-ROS-GEE Document 7 Filed 06/16/06 Page 2 of 2