John Peter Archer v. Donald Pixley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN PETER ARCHER, CV 23-6251 DSF (JDE)

Plaintiff,

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT

v. AND RECOMMENDATION OF

UNITED STATES

DONALD PIXLEY, et al., MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendants.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First and Second Amended Complaints, the United States Magistrate Judge’s screening orders regarding those complaints, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (“Report”), Plaintiff’s “Opposition” to the Report, which the Court construes as his objections to the Report (“Objections”), and other relevant records on file. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the portions of the Report to which Objections were directed. Although not required, the Court briefly discusses the following points. See United States v. Ramos, 65 F.4th 427, 434 (9th Cir. 2023) (“the district court ha[s] no obligation to provide individualized analysis of each objection”); Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 (9th Cir. 2005) (affirming a cursory district court order summarily adopting, without addressing any objections, a magistrate judge’s report and…