Dak v. Rosa 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
John Gatwich Dak,
Petitioner,
v.
Luis Rosa, Jr., et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-04215-PHX-MTL
ORDER
Before the Court is Petitioner John Gatwich Dak’s Petition (Doc. 1) and United
States Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc.
25). The R&R recommends that the Court deny and dismiss the amended petition without
prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had
fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could
be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. See United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Neither party filed objections, which
relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121;
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any
review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s
disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the
R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will accept the R&R in its entirety. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole
Case 2:25-cv-04215-MTL Document 27 Filed 04/09/26 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
or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition;
receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.”).
IT IS ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 25) is ACCEPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner’s petition (Doc. 1) is DENIED and
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment
accordingly and terminate this case.
Dated this 9th day of April, 2026.
Case 2:25-cv-04215-MTL Document 27 Filed 04/09/26 Page 2 of 2