Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01054/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-01054-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 

Imran Ahmad Jamali, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Stephanie Danica Low, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-13-01054-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Order a Property Seizure to 

Satisfy a Default Judgment (Doc. 206), Motion to Add Collection to Default Judgment 

(Doc. 235), Motion to Order Judgment/Debtor Judgment against Defendant Adair (Doc. 

236) and United States Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle’s Report and Recommendation 

(“R&R”) (Doc. 237). The R&R recommends that the Court grant two of the Motions 

(Docs. 206, 236) and deny the third Motion (Doc. 235). Doc. 237 at 6. 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 

Case 2:13-cv-01054-GMS Document 239 Filed 10/01/15 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 

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 as indicated above. 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 John Z. Boyle’s R&R (Doc. 237) is accepted. 

 2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Order a Property Seizure to Satisfy a Default 

Judgment (Doc. 206) and Motion to Order Judgment/Debtor to Turnover Property (Doc. 

236) are GRANTED and Plaintiff is directed to file a proposed writ of execution for the 

Clerk of Court’s signature. 

 3. Plaintiff’s Motion to Add Collection to Default judgment (Doc. 235) is 

DENIED. 

 Dated this 1st day of October, 2015. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge

Case 2:13-cv-01054-GMS Document 239 Filed 10/01/15 Page 2 of 2