Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_01-cv-00245/USCOURTS-azd-4_01-cv-00245-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other 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

1

The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation.

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to

portions of the Report and Recommendation. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739

(7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jose Chavez, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

United States of America, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 01-245-TUC-FRZ (JM)

ORDER

Pending before the Court are two Reports and Recommendations issued by United States

Magistrate Judge Marshall. In the first Report and Recommendation (Doc. 178), Magistrate

Judge Marshall recommends granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction or in the alternative for judgment on the pleadings. In the second Report

and Recommendation (Doc. 179), Magistrate Judge Marshall recommends denying the

motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by Defendants James Ziglar, David Aguilar,

Ralph Hunt, Alvaro Obregon, Felix Chavez, and Michael Campbell. The Court has reviewed

the parties’ respective objections and responses to the objections. As the Court finds that the

Reports and Recommendations properly resolved the motions at issue, the parties’ objections

are denied.1

Case 4:01-cv-00245-FRZ-JR Document 190 Filed 09/23/10 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 HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

(1) The two Reports and Recommendations (Doc. 178, 179) are accepted and adopted.

(2) Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or in the alternative

for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 126) is granted.

(3) The motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by Defendants James Ziglar, David

Aguilar, Ralph Hunt, Alvaro Obregon, Felix Chavez, and Michael Campbell (Doc. 143) is

denied.

(4) As the previous referral pertains to all pretrial proceedings, and pretrial proceeding

remain in this case, the referral to Magistrate Judge Marshall is still in effect. All filings in

this action shall be designated as: CV 01-245-TUC-FRZ (JM). 

DATED this 23rd day of September, 2010.

Case 4:01-cv-00245-FRZ-JR Document 190 Filed 09/23/10 Page 2 of 2