White v. Coin Hub 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
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
David C White,
Plaintiff,
v.
Coin Hub, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-26-01841-PHX-ASB
ORDER
This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge Alison S. Bachus. (Doc. 2). On May
4, 2026, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation with this Court.1 (Doc.
10). To date, no objections have been filed. The Magistrate Judge recommends that
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter
1 	This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have
consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court
pursuant to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part:
When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been
assigned 	pursuant 	to 	Local 	Rule 	3.7(a)(1) 	considers 	dismissal 	to 	be
appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1)
due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent
to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge,
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and
Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court
Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on
my behalf:
Phoenix/Prescott: 	Senior 	United 	States 	District 	Judge 	Stephen 	M.
McNamee
Case 2:26-cv-01841-ASB Document 11 Filed 05/27/26 Page 1 of 3

- 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
jurisdiction. (Doc. 20).
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v.
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the
service of a copy of the Magistrate’s recommendation within which to file specific
written objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to
object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo
review of the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and waives all objections to those
findings on appeal. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to
object to a Magistrate Judge’s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the
propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal.” Id.
DISCUSSION
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and no
Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby incorporates and
adopts the Magistrate 	Judge’s 	Report 	and 	Recommendation. (Doc. 10). 	Moreover,
Plaintiff has not properly pled how this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over his
Complaint. (Id.)
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth,
IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge. (Doc. 10).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) without
prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file an amended complaint on or
before June 12, 2026.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file an amended
complaint he must comply with Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
Case 2:26-cv-01841-ASB Document 11 Filed 05/27/26 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
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
include all the claims that he wishes to allege, jurisdictional basis, and the allegations that
his 	claims 	are 	based 	upon, 	even 	if 	he 	previously 	presented 	them 	in 	his 	original
Complaint. No part of the original Complaint may be incorporated by reference.
IT 	IS 	FURTHER 	ORDERED 	that 	if 	Plaintiff 	does 	not 	file 	an 	amended
complaint on or before June 12, 2026, then the Clerk of Court must, without further
notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without prejudice and terminate this
action.
Dated this 21st day of May, 2026.
Case 2:26-cv-01841-ASB Document 11 Filed 05/27/26 Page 3 of 3