Hernandez v. Experian Information Solutions Incorporated

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
Edward T Hernandez,
Plaintiff,
v.
Experian Information Solutions
Incorporated,
Defendant.
No. CV-25-00449-TUC-SHR (LCK)
ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 36) issued by
United States Magistrate Judge Lynette C. Kimmins recommending the Court enter an
order granting Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration (Doc. 26) and stay the case while
the parties engage in arbitration. Neither party objects to the R&R.
A district court reviews objected-to portions of an R&R de novo. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617
(9th Cir. 1989). Failure to timely object may be considered a waiver of a party’s right to
de novo consideration of the issues. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121–
22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule 72(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure state “[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note
to 1983 addition; see also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999).
Case 4:25-cv-00449-SHR-LCK Document 37 Filed 05/08/26 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
After independent review, the Court is satisfied Judge Kimmins’ recommendation
is sound. The Court will adopt the R&R in full.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED the R&R (Doc. 52) is ADOPTED IN FULL.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration (Doc.
26) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED this case is STAYED while the parties engage in
arbitration.
Dated this 7th day of May, 2026.
Case 4:25-cv-00449-SHR-LCK Document 37 Filed 05/08/26 Page 2 of 2