Terryberry v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company

Filing 71

ORDER accepting and adopting 70 Report and Recommendation. Denying without prejudice 62 Motion for Re-Taxation of Costs. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter notice of Defendant's taxation of costs. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 4/14/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

WILLIAM TERRYBERRY,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE
)
COMPANY; DOES I through XX, inclusive; )
and/or ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX, )
inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 2:13-cv-00658-GMN-CWH
ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States

12

Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman, (ECF No. 70), which recommends that Plaintiff William

13

Terryberry’s Motion for Retaxation of Costs (ECF No. 62) be DENIED without prejudice.

14

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a

15

United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1–4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);

16

D. Nev. R. IB 3–2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo

17

determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject,

18

or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

19

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3–2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is

20

not required to conduct “any review at all ... of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”

21

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a

22

district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where

23

no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122

24

(9th Cir. 2003).

25

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.

Page 1 of 2

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 70) is

3

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent that it is not inconsistent with this Order.

4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff William Terryberry’s Motion for

5
6
7
8

Retaxation of Costs (ECF No. 62) be DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court be directed to enter notice of
Defendant’s taxation of costs.
DATED this 14th day of April, 2015.

9
10
11
12

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2