Ward
v.
Life Care Ctrs. of Am. Inc.

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONANov 5, 2018
No. CV-16-00741-TUC-RCC (JMR) (D. Ariz. Nov. 5, 2018)

No. CV-16-00741-TUC-RCC (JMR)

11-05-2018

Bill Ward, Plaintiff, v. Life Care Centers of America Incorporated, Defendant.


ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Life Care Centers of America, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgement pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and LRCiv. 56.1 (Doc. 51) and Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau's Report and Recommendation ("R&R")(Doc. 59). Neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed objections to the R&R, which recommends that this Court should grant Defendant's motion.

The duties of the district court in connection with a R&R are set forth in Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Thereunder the district court may "accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Where the parties object to an R&R, "[a] judge of the [district] court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the [R & R] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). When no objection is filed, the district court need not review the R&R de novo. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n. 13 (9th Cir.2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). "[T]he magistrate judge's decision...is entitled to great deference by the district court." United States v. Abonce-Barrera, 257 F.3d 959, 969 (9th Cir. 2001). The Court will not disturb a magistrate judge's recommendation unless his factual findings are clearly erroneous or his legal conclusions are contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).

Having independently reviewed the pleadings and record in this matter, this Court considers the R&R to be thorough and well-reasoned. The Court will accept and adopt the R&R in its entirety. As the underlying motion seeks summary judgment on all of Plaintiff's claims, the Court further finds that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED: 1. This Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Rateau's R&R (Doc. 59). 2. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 51) is GRANTED. 3. This case is DISMISSED with Prejudice. 4. The Clerk of the Court shall close its file in this matter.

Dated this 5th day of November, 2018.

/s/_________


Honorable Raner C. Collins


United States District Judge