3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Delfino De Leon-Ramirez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Delfino De Leon-Ramirez Anchor | green | “appeal a magistrate judge's findings that were not objected to below, as 28 u.s.c. 636(b) doesn't require de novo review absent objection” | 15 |
| 2 | United States v. Hernandez-Aguilar | green | “absent a specific and timely filed objection, the court reviews only for 'clear error,' and need not give any explanation for adopting the pfr.” | 13 |
| 3 | Howard's Yellow Cabs, Inc. v. United States | green | “to preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge's report, a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as to reasonably alert the district court of the true ground for the objection.” | 7 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.