ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL

LARRY ALAN BURNS, District Judge.

Plaintiff Ricardo Rivera filed his complaint on October 28, 2010, bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants then moved to dismiss, and their motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Bernard Skomal for report and recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On February 7, 2012, Judge Skomal issued his report and recommendation (the "R&R"), recommending that the complaint be dismissed without leave to amend, because Rivera had not exhausted his administrative remedies and it was too late for him to do so. The R&R also recommended declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Rivera's state law claims, since his federal claims would be dismissed. The R&R required any party wishing to object to file objections within seventeen days of being served with the R&R. Since then, no objections have been filed.

A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). "The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Id. "A judge of the 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). When, as here, no objections are filed, the Court need not review de novo the Report and Recommendation. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005).

The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds it to be correct. Because neither party objects to it, the Court ADOPTS it. This action is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

IT SO ORDERED.