1 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4

WESTERN DIVISION

5 6 7 ALVARO QUEZADA, No. ED CV 18-00251-VBF-MAA 8 Plaintiff,

ORDER

9 v. Overruling Plaintiff’s Objections; Adopting Report & Recommendation; 10 tru o C tc irtsiD se ta tS a in ro fila C fo tc irtsiD 1 111 2 431

tN

hi. s M

cP auc sD r es ,O u ta hW n et E

atL o p pL

2 l 8 ie c t U a Da b.l lSe. e, f .

Ce lan . w d §a , n 6 at 3 ns 6 d. ( tb h) e(1 w), eth llD [ e -D r e C eon aocy s u oi #n r n t2g

eh7 dD a] s Re f r ee e pn v od i rea twn at es nd’ d M

tho et i ro en c oto rd D s i is nm

iss d e tin U la rtn e C 11 65

Recommendation (“R&R”) of the United States Magistrate Judge. As required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), the Court has engaged in de novo review of the 17 portions of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) to which plaintiff has 18 specifically objected and finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the R&R. The 19 Court finds discussion of the objections to be unnecessary on this record. “The 20 Magistrates Act ‘merely requires the district judge to make a de novo 21 determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or 22 recommendation to which objection is made.’” It does not require a written 23 explanation of the reasons for rejecting objections. See MacKenzie v. Calif. AG, 24 2016 WL 5339566, *1 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2016) (citation omitted). “This is 25 particularly true where, as here, the objections are plainly unavailing.” Smith v. 26 Calif. Jud. Council, 2016 WL 6069179, *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2016). 27 28 1 | | Accordingly, the Court will accept the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings and 2 | legal conclusions and implement the R&R’s recommendations. 3 ORDER 4 Plaintiff's objections [Doc # 40] are OVERRULED. 5 The Report and Recommendation [Doc # 39] is ADOPTED. 6 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint [Doc # 27] is 7 | DENIED. This denial is without prejudice to Defendants’ re-raising the issues 8 | of (1) Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, and (2) Qualified Immunity, at a 9 | later stage in these proceedings. 10 The case remains open and referred to the United States Magistrate Judge. p.s BE tl Ss IT IS SO ORDERED. BS n BS

Q D 3B

gs Dated: August 12, 2019 leten Liber Fawhoashe aa! HON. VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK SE 15 Senior United States District Judge ze Po 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28