Mundo v. Griffin et al

Filing 8

ORDER Adopting 7 Report and Recommendation in its entirety. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the action be DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk of the court shall close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 08/09/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8

JONATHAN W. MUNDO,

9
10
11

2:13-CV-612 JCM (NJK)

Plaintiff(s),
v.
STEVEN GRIFFIN, et al.,

12
13

Defendant(s).

14

ORDER

15

Presently before the court is the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Koppe.

16

(Doc. # 7). No objections have been filed and the deadline date for filing objections has expired.

17

This court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

18

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party timely objects

19

to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de novo

20

determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made.”

21

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

22

Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all

23

. . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

24

Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate

25

judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v.

26

Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the

27

district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objections were made); see

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s

2

decision in Reyna–Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review “any

3

issue that is not the subject of an objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s

4

recommendation, then this court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g.,

5

Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation

6

to which no objection was filed).

7

Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine

8

whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate judge. Upon reviewing the recommendation

9

and underlying briefs, this court finds good cause appears to ADOPT the magistrate’s findings in

10

full.

11

Accordingly,

12

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the report and

13

recommendation of Magistrate Judge Koppe (doc. # 7) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in

14

its entirety.

15
16
17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the action be dismissed without prejudice. The clerk of
the court shall close the case.
DATED August 9, 2013.

18
19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-