Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02318/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02318-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOWELL FINLEY,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 11-CV-2318 JLS (PCL)

ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION;

(2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS

(ECF Nos. 8, 18)

vs.

A. DE LA TRINIDAD et al.,

Defendants.

Presently before the Court are Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) and Magistrate

Judge Lewis’s report and recommendation, which advises that the Court grant Defendants’ motion

(ECF No. 18).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district court’s

duties in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The district 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); see also United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 673–76

(1980); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of

timely objection, the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the

record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note

(citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).

- 1 - 11cv2318

Case 3:11-cv-02318-JLS-PCL Document 26 Filed 05/11/12 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

Here, Plaintiff has failed to timely file objections to Magistrate Judge Lewis’s report and

recommendation. Having reviewed the report and recommendation, the Court finds that it is

thorough, well reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the Court hereby (1) ADOPTS

Magistrate Judge Lewis’s report and recommendation, (2) GRANTS Defendants’ motion to

dismiss. All of Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Gonzalez and Chavez, as well as Plaintiff’s

negligence claim against Defendant Diaz, are dismissed without prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 11, 2012

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

- 2 - 11cv2318

Case 3:11-cv-02318-JLS-PCL Document 26 Filed 05/11/12 Page 2 of 2