Kline v. Tucson, City of 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
James David Kline,
Plaintiff,
v.
City of Tucson,
Defendant.
No. CV-26-00018-TUC-JGZ
ORDER
On April 9, 2026, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) in which she recommended the Court grant Plaintiff’s IFP
Application and dismiss the Complaint. (Doc. 13.) The R&R notified Plaintiff he had
fourteen (14) days from the date of the R&R to file any objections. No objections have
been filed.
This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). “[T]he district
judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if
objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121
(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original). District courts are not required to conduct
“any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.
The Court has reviewed Judge Rateau’s R&R and the Complaint. The Court finds
the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Rateau’s conclusion that the IFP
Case 4:26-cv-00018-JGZ-JR Document 15 Filed 04/27/26 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
Application should be granted and the Complaint should be dismissed with leave to
amend.1 See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d at 1448 (leave to amend is liberally granted unless
absolutely clear deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment). The Court has provided the
reasons for the dismissal to permit Plaintiff to make an intelligent decision whether to file
a First Amended Complaint. See Bonanno v. Thomas, 309 F.2d 320, 322 (9th Cir. 1962).
Any amended complaint filed by Plaintiff must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety
and may not incorporate any part of the original Complaint by reference. An amended
complaint must be clearly designated as the First Amended Complaint on the face of the
document and formatted in compliance with LRCiv 7.1. Plaintiff is advised that if an
amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the Court will
likely dismiss this action. Additionally, Plaintiff is advised that if he fails to timely comply
with every provision of this Order, this action will be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b). See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court may
dismiss action for failure to comply with any order of the Court).
Accordingly,
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
1 The Court suggests Plaintiff review the Court’s informational Handbook for Self-
Represented Litigants, available at https://www.azd.uscourts.gov/proceeding-without-
attorney-0, prior to submitting an amended complaint.
Case 4:26-cv-00018-JGZ-JR Document 15 Filed 04/27/26 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
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13) is accepted and adopted in full.
Plaintiff’s IFP Application (Doc. 2) is granted, and Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is
dismissed without prejudice.
2. If Plaintiff fails to file a First Amended Complaint within 30 days, the Clerk
of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without
prejudice.
Dated this 24th day of April, 2026.
Case 4:26-cv-00018-JGZ-JR Document 15 Filed 04/27/26 Page 3 of 3