The following excerpt is from Knox v. Castaneda, CASE NO. 13cv2985-WQH-RBB (S.D. Cal. 2017):
The duties of the district court in connection with a Report and Recommendation of a magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). The district court must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made[,]" and "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); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). The district court need not review de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which neither party objects. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) ("Neither the Constitution nor the [Federal Magistrates Act] requires a district judge to review, de novo, findings and recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct.").
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.