Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01512/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01512-1/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

Jose Elycio, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph Arpaio, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.05-1512-PHX-ROS

ORDER

On May 20, 2005 Plaintiff, who was at that time incarcerated at the Durango Jail, filed

the instant civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. #1). On September 26,

2005 Magistrate Judge Aspey issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending

that the Complaint be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and Rule 16.2(b)(2)(B) of the United States District Court for the District of

Arizona Local Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. #7). No objections were filed by either party.

The Court "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). It is "clear that the

district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if

objection is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

1126 (D. Ariz. 2003) ("Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo review of

Case 2:05-cv-01512-ROS Document 9 Filed 07/05/06 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 -

factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, 'but not otherwise."'). District

courts are not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject

of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). No objection having been

made, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. #7) is ADOPTED and

this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

DATED this 5th day of July, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-01512-ROS Document 9 Filed 07/05/06 Page 2 of 2