Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00291/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00291-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:1981hs Housing Discrimination

---

1

15cv291 AJB (NLS)

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

ROZ ALEXANDER-KASPARIK, as an 

individual and in her capacity as the 

Conservator of DAVID RECTOR,

Plaintiffs,

v.

TRILOGY REAL ESTATE 

MANAGEMENT; SIMON LEVI LLC; 

and DOES 1-10, inclusive,

Defendants. 

Case No.: 15cv291 AJB (NLS)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION AND 

DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF 

ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION

(Doc. No. 44)

This housing discrimination matter was filed on February 11, 2015, by Plaintiff Roz 

Alexander-Kasparik (“Plaintiff”) as an individual and in her capacity as the conservator 

of David Rector while represented by counsel. (See Doc. Nos. 1, 44.) After initiating suit 

against Defendants Trilogy Real Estate Management and Simon Levi LLC 

(“Defendants”), Plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, which was 

unopposed by Plaintiff and subsequently granted by the Court. (Doc. Nos. 26, 29.) 

Thereafter, Plaintiff was provided with time to obtain new counsel, but after repeated 

attempts to do so, has been unable to obtain representation. (Doc. No. 44 at 3.) 

After multiple continuances of time for Plaintiff to obtain representation, the Court set 

Case 3:15-cv-00291-AJB-NLS Document 45 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 3
2

15cv291 AJB (NLS)

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

an order to show cause regarding why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to 

obtain attorney representation. (Id.) Thereafter, Magistrate Judge Stormes issued a Report 

and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s claims 

without prejudice for failure to obtain attorney representation. (Id.) The R&R specifically 

recommends dismissal because Plaintiff filed this matter in her capacity as the 

conservator of David Rector and well-established law in the Ninth Circuit precludes nonattorneys from representing others in a lawsuit. (Id. at 5) (citing cases). The R&R set a 

deadline for objections of November 20, 2015, and a deadline for a reply to any 

objections of November 30, 2015. (Id.) Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants have filed an 

objection to the R&R, and a review of Plaintiff’s response to the order to show cause 

demonstrates Plaintiff requests dismissal without prejudice given her inability to obtain 

counsel. (See Doc. No. 42 at 1.) 

A district judge “may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition” on a 

dispositive matter prepared by a magistrate judge proceeding without the consent of the 

parties for all purposes. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district judge 

must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is 

made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 

(9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of objection(s), 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(b), Advisory Committee Notes (1983); see also 

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (noting § 636(b)(1) 

“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). 

///

///

Case 3:15-cv-00291-AJB-NLS Document 45 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 3
3

15cv291 AJB (NLS)

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 absence of objection and for the reasons set forth in the R&R, the Court 

concludes dismissal without prejudice is appropriate and thus ADOPTS the R&R and 

DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s claims for lack of attorney 

representation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 24, 2015

Case 3:15-cv-00291-AJB-NLS Document 45 Filed 11/24/15 Page 3 of 3