Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02474/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02474-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 350
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action

---

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 

Simon Russell, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Werner Enterprises Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-14-02474-TUC-RM (EJM)

ORDER 

 On July 20, 2016, Magistrate Judge Eric J. Markovich issued a Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 88) recommending that this Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion to 

Consolidate (Doc. 55). No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed. 

 A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a 

magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which 

objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule 

72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is 

filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record 

in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 

advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 

F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the 

district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan, 

CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for 

clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation). 

Case 4:14-cv-02474-RM-EJM Document 95 Filed 08/16/16 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

 The Court has reviewed Judge Markovich’s Report and Recommendation, the 

parties’ briefs, and the record. The Court finds no error in Judge Markovich’s Report and 

Recommendation. Accordingly, 

 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 88) is accepted 

and adopted in full. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Consolidate (Doc. 55) is 

granted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned case, Russell v. Werner 

Enterprises, CV 14-02474-TUC-RM(EJM), is consolidated with Russell v. Flores, CV 

16-00088-TUC-RM, for all further proceedings. All future filings shall be made in 

Russell v. Werner Enterprises, CV 14-02474-TUC-RM(EJM). 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter will continue to be referred to 

Magistrate Judge Eric J. Markovich for all pretrial proceedings and report and 

recommendation, in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and LRCiv 

72.1 and 72.2. 

 Dated this 12th day of August, 2016. 

Honorable Rosemary Márquez

United States District Judge

Case 4:14-cv-02474-RM-EJM Document 95 Filed 08/16/16 Page 2 of 2