Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_07-cv-00309/USCOURTS-azd-4_07-cv-00309-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

The Report and Recommendation was mailed to Plaintiff and others not signed up for

CM/ECF on August 12, 2009.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Cheryl Wells, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Hon. Jan E. Kearney, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States

Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Marshall whereby she recommends granting several motions

to dismiss and addresses several other motions.

The Report and Recommendation was issued on August 11, 2009.1

 The parties have

not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation, the time for filing objections

expired, and the Court will not consider any untimely objections.

The Court has reviewed the entire record and concludes that Magistrate Judge

Marshall’s recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R.

Civ. P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); Conley v.

Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

(1) United States Magistrate Judge Marshall's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #101) is

ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED.

Case 4:07-cv-00309-FRZ-JR Document 108 Filed 09/03/09 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 -

(2) The motions to dismiss filed by the defendants (Doc. #’s 46,60,62,63,68,69 ) are granted;

these defendants are dismissed with prejudice and the Clerk of the Court shall enter

judgment accordingly.

(3) Defendant Broad and Cassel’s and Defendant Kevin Kinghorn’s motions for summary

disposition (Doc. #’s 95,97) are granted.

(4) Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to respond (Doc. #96) is denied.

(5) Plaintiff is ordered to show cause as to why Defendant John Knox Village’s motion for

sanctions (Doc. #86) and Defendant Broad and Cassel’s motion for sanctions (Doc. #94)

should not be granted. Plaintiff shall show cause by filing a brief addressing the sanctions

issues no later than September 18, 2009.

(6) This case is hereby referred back to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline J. Marshall for all

pretrial proceedings and report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, and LRCiv 72.1, 72.2, and 72.3 of Rules of Practice of

the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. 

All future filings in this case shall be designated:

CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ (JJM)

DATED this 3rd day of September, 2009.

Case 4:07-cv-00309-FRZ-JR Document 108 Filed 09/03/09 Page 2 of 2