Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-00556/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-00556-1/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 

Steven George Jacovo, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Unknown Lowe, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-14-00556-PHX-GMS (DMF)

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is United States Magistrate Deborah M. Fine’s Report 

and Recommendation (“R&R”). Doc. 102. The R&R recommends that the Court 

dismiss Defendant Diane Bryan for failure to serve within the time specified by the 

Court. Doc. 102 at 3. 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 7 (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 dismiss Defendant Diane Bryan from this 

Case 2:14-cv-00556-GMS-DMF Document 112 Filed 05/12/16 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 

action. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (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 Fine’s R&R (Doc. 102) is accepted. 

 2. Defendant Diane Bryan is dismissed from this action. 

 Dated this 12th day of May, 2016. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge

Case 2:14-cv-00556-GMS-DMF Document 112 Filed 05/12/16 Page 2 of 2