De La Cruz v. Mi Nidito Restaurant 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
Maria De La Cruz,
Plaintiff,
v.
Mi Nidito Restaurant Incorporated,
Defendant.
No. CV-26-00205-TUC-JR
ORDER
On May 5, 2026, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau issued a report and
recommendation (R & R) recommending the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Doc.
10.) The Magistrate Judge informed the Plaintiff she had fourteen days to file an
objection. (Id.) The time has passed and no objection has been filed.
The standard of review of a magistrate judge’s R&R is dependent upon whether a
party objects: where there is no objection to a magistrate’s factual or legal
determinations, the district court need not review the decision “under a de novo or any
other standard.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, when a party
objects, the district court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s
disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge 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); see also 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1). Moreover, “while the statute does not require the judge to review an issue de
novo if no objections are filed, it does not preclude further review by the district judge,
Case 4:26-cv-00205-JR Document 12 Filed 05/19/26 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
sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas,
474 U.S. at 154.
The Court has reviewed the Complaint (Doc. 1), the In Forma Pauperis
Application (Doc. 2), the Summons (Doc. 3) and the Magistrate Judge’s R & R (Doc.
10). The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Rateau’s conclusions.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
1) Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (Doc. 10.)
2) Plaintiff’s the In Forma Pauperis Application is GRANTED. (Doc. 2.)
3) This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Doc. 10.)
Dated this 19th day of May, 2026.
Case 4:26-cv-00205-JR Document 12 Filed 05/19/26 Page 2 of 2