Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-02390/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-02390-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:77 Securities Fraud

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lawrence J. Warfield, as Receiver, 

Judgment Creditor, 

vs.

Michael Alaniz; Charles Davis; et al., 

Judgment Debtors, 

ING USA Annuity Life and Insurance Co.,

Garnishee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 03-2390-PHX-JAT

ORDER

On October 15, 2007, Judgment-Creditor Lawrence Warfield applied for Judgment

on Garnishment for non-earnings against Garnishee ING USA Annuity Life and Insurance

Co. (Doc. #804). In its Verified Answer, Garnishee ING USA Annuity Life and Insurance

Co. indicated that at the time the writ of garnishment was served, ING USA owed the

Judgment-Debtor Robert Carroll the total sum of $9,929.11 (Doc. #762 at 1). JudgmentDebtor Robert Carroll did not file an objection to the writ of garnishment, the Answer of the

Garnishee, or the Application for Judgment on Garnishment. On October 22, 2007, the

Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)(Doc. #808) recommending

that the Court enter a Judgment on Garnishment against Garnishee ING USA Annuity Life

and Insurance Co. in the total sum of $9,929.11.

Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT Document 822 Filed 12/06/07 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 -

Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts

the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not

required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”

(emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en

banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s

findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis

in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc.

#808) is ACCEPTED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING Warfield’s Application for Judgment

on Garnishment (Doc. #804) against Garnishee ING USA Annuity Life and Insurance Co.

in the amount of $9,929.11.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the amounts retained by Garnishee ING USA

Annuity Life and Insurance Co. pursuant to the writ of garnishment and this Order are to be

immediately paid to Lawrence J. Warfield, as Receiver, c/o its attorney Michael Zdancewicz,

P.L.L.C. 

DATED this 6th day of December, 2007.

Case 2:03-cv-02390-JAT Document 822 Filed 12/06/07 Page 2 of 2