Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-akd-3_18-cr-00035/USCOURTS-akd-3_18-cr-00035-22/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Louis Holger Eklund
Defendant
Louis Holger
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

LOUIS HOLGER EKLUND, 

Defendant.

Case No. 3:18-cr-00035-SLG-MMS

ORDER RE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court at Docket 752 is Defendant Eklund’s Motion for Medical 

Marijuana Permission Without a Medical Card. The Government did not file a 

response to the Motion. The motion was referred to the Honorable Magistrate 

Judge Matthew M. Scoble. At Docket 779, Judge Scoble issued his Report and 

Recommendation, in which he recommended that the motion be denied. No 

objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed.

The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). That 

statute provides that a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 

part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.”1 A court is 

to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s 

report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is 

1 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Case 3:18-cr-00035-SLG-MMS Document 783 Filed 01/14/25 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 3:18-cr-00035-SLG, USA v. Eklund

Order re Report and Recommendation 

Page 2 of 2

made.”2 However, § 636(b)(1) does not “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.”3

The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court deny the Motion for 

Medical Marijuana Permission Without a Medical Card. The Court has reviewed 

the Report and Recommendation and agrees that the motion must be DENIED. 

However, the Court does not adopt the report insofar as it may be read to imply 

that under certain circumstances, the conditions of federal supervised release may 

be modified to permit the use of medical marijuana. See United States v. Langley, 

17 F. 4th 1273, 1274-75 (9th Cir. 2021). Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED 

that the Motion for Medical Marijuana Permission Without a Medical Card at 

Docket 752 is DENIED.

DATED this 14th day of January 2025.

/s/ Sharon L. Gleason 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2 Id.

3 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 

1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

Case 3:18-cr-00035-SLG-MMS Document 783 Filed 01/14/25 Page 2 of 2