Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_18-cv-00004/USCOURTS-azd-2_18-cv-00004-3/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

Robert Angel Ramirez,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Corizon Health, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-18-00004-PHX-DWL

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the United 

States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 73). The R&R, which was issued on January 30, 2020, 

recommends “that the Court dismiss without prejudice Defendant Brisbois from Plaintiff’s 

Complaint (Doc. 1) for failure to serve pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).” (Doc. 73 at 3.) 

The R&R further states that “[t]he parties shall have fourteen days from the date of service 

of a copy of this recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the 

Court.” (Id.) 

Here, no such objections have been filed. Thus, the Court accepts the Magistrate 

Judge’s recommendation. See, e.g., Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985) (“It does 

not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate’s factual 

or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to 

those findings.”); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (“[N]o 

review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are 

filed.”). See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) 

Case 2:18-cv-00004-DWL Document 74 Filed 02/27/20 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

(“[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations 

de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.”). 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the R&R’s recommended disposition (Doc. 73) is accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Brisbois is dismissed from this 

action, the dismissal being without prejudice.

Dated this 27th day of February, 2020.

Case 2:18-cv-00004-DWL Document 74 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 2