Danaher v. Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C.

Filing 6

ORDER Adopting in its entirety 5 Report and Recommendation. ORDER that 1 plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 12/12/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

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

GREGORY DANAHER,

9
10
11
12

2:13-CV-1633 JCM (NJK)

Plaintiff(s),
v.
FREDERICK J. HANA AND
ASSOCIATES, P.C.,

13

Defendant(s).

14
15

ORDER

16
17

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation. (Doc.
# 5).

18

On September 24, 2013, the magistrate judge found that plaintiff’s complaint failed to state

19

a claim and allowed plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has neither filed an

20

amended complaint nor requested an extension of time. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply

21

with the screening order may result in the dismissal of his complaint. Plaintiff has failed to comply

22

with the screening order, and the magistrate recommends the complaint be dismissed. No objections

23

to the recommendation have been filed and the deadline to do so has passed.

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

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

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

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

12

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

13

to which no objection was filed).

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

full.

18

Accordingly,

19

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Magistrate Judge Koppe’s

20
21
22
23

report and recommendation (doc. # 5) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in its entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint (doc. # 1) be DISMISSED. The clerk
shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case.
DATED December 12, 2013.

24
25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-