Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00787/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00787-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983pr Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

[Case Number]

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

ANTONIO LASALE HANNAH

Plaintiff,

v.

CORPORAL RAMIREZ

Defendant.

Case No.: 19cv787-LAB (BLM)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT 

AND RECOMMENDATION; AND

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

DISMISS

Plaintiff, a prisoner in state custody, brings claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Defendant Corporal Ramirez moved to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative 

remedies, and the motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara Major for 

report and recommendation. On January 2, Judge Major issued her report and 

recommendation (the “R&R”), recommending that the motion be denied. 

Objections were due January 24, but none have been filed.

A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and 

recommendation on dispositive matters. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 

72(b). “The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's 

disposition that has been properly objected to.” Id. Section 636(b)(1) similarly 

Case 3:19-cv-00787-LAB-BLM Document 18 Filed 01/28/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

[Case Number]

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

requires that a district judge “make a de novo determination of those portions of 

the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection 

is made.” “A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, 

the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id. 

This section does not require some lesser review by the district court when 

no objections are filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985). The “statute 

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.” United 

States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis 

in original).

The Court has reviewed the R&R, finds it to be correct, and ADOPTS it. The 

motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2020

Honorable Larry Alan Burns

Chief United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-00787-LAB-BLM Document 18 Filed 01/28/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2