Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01202/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01202-3/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 

Donald Dean, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Terry Allred, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-13-01202-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Join Additional Parties and 

United States Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). 

Docs. 97, 100. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Motion. Doc. 100 at 5. 

The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to 

the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the 

right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 5 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. 

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). 

 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 

review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 

(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 

not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 

objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is welltaken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny the Motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 

Case 2:13-cv-01202-JJT-MEA Document 118 Filed 06/17/14 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

(stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 

findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The 

district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further 

evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”). 

IT IS ORDERED:

 1. Magistrate Judge Aspey’s R&R (Doc. 100) is accepted. 

 2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Join Additional Parties (Doc. 97) is denied. 

 Dated this 17th day of June, 2014. 

Case 2:13-cv-01202-JJT-MEA Document 118 Filed 06/17/14 Page 2 of 2