Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01412/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01412-3/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

JAY LYNN PEMBER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DORA SCHRIRO, et al.,

Defendants. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-05-1412-PHX-SMM (BPV)

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Jay Lynn Pember's pro se "Civil Rights Complaint

By A Prisoner." [Doc. No. 1] On January 30, 2006, Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco

filed a Report and Recommendation, advising this Court that Plaintiff's complaint should be

dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. [Doc. No. 5] To date, Petitioner has not

filed objections to Judge Velasco's Report and Recommendation.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

When reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, this Court must

"make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made,”

and “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)(C); see also Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391,

1394 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.

1983)). Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of

conducting de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings; the Court then may

Case 2:05-cv-01412-SMM Document 9 Filed 03/17/06 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 -

decide the dispositive motion on the applicable law. Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208

(9th Cir. 1979) (citing Campbell v. United States Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974)).

By failing to object to a Report and Recommendation, a party waives its right to

challenge the Magistrate's factual findings, but not necessarily the Magistrate's legal

conclusions. Baxter, 923 F.2d at 1394; see also Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir.

1998) (failure to object to Magistrate's legal conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering

the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal”); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156

(9th Cir. 1991) (citing McCall v. Andrus, 628 F.2d 1185, 1187 (9th Cir. 1980)).

DISCUSSION

Having reviewed the legal conclusions of the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, and no objections having been made by Petitioner thereto, the Court hereby

incorporates and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Bernardo P. Velasco. [Doc. No. 5]

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. No. 1] is dismissed

without prejudice, terminating this case.

DATED this 16th day of March, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-01412-SMM Document 9 Filed 03/17/06 Page 2 of 2