USA v. Valencia et al

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
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v.
Gabriel Valencia,
Defendant.
No. CR-25-02676-001-TUC-SHR (BGM)
ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 52) issued by
United States Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald recommending the Court deny
Defendant’s combined Motion to Dismiss Indictment and for Bill of Particulars (Doc. 34).
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-cr-02676-SHR-MAA Document 60 Filed 03/20/26 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 Macdonald’s
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 Dismiss Indictment and for
Bill of Particulars (Doc. 34) is DENIED.
Dated this 20th day of March, 2026.
Case 4:25-cr-02676-SHR-MAA Document 60 Filed 03/20/26 Page 2 of 2