Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01477/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01477-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Alberto Torres, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

City of Phoenix, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-01477-PHX-ROS

ORDER

On July 13, 2010, Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey issued a Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that this case be dismissed. Plaintiff did not file

any objections.

A district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 USC § 636(b). Where any party has

filed timely objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendations, the district

court’s review of the part objected to is to be de novo. Id. If, however, no objections are

filed, the district court need not conduct such a review. Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp.

2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“Following Reyna-Tapia, this Court concludes that de novo

review of factual and legal issues is required if objections are made, but not otherwise.”)

(internal quotations and citations omitted). Plaintiff did not file any objections and the R&R

will be adopted in full.

Case 2:09-cv-01477-ROS Document 19 Filed 08/30/10 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 -

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16) is ADOPTED. The

Clerk shall close this case.

DATED this 30th day of August, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01477-ROS Document 19 Filed 08/30/10 Page 2 of 2