Docouto et al v. Nanz et al

Filing 13

ORDER Accepting 11 Report and Recommendation. The case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 11/21/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

ALBERTO DOCOUTO,

10
11
12

Case No. 2:13-cv-01765-RFB-GWF
Plaintiff,
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

v.
DAVID G. NANZ, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

16

Judge George W. Foley, Jr. (Doc. 11, July 25, 2014) recommending dismissal of this case with

17

prejudice. No objection was filed to Magistrate Judge Foley’s Report and Recommendation in

18

accordance with Local Rule LR IB 3-2 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District

19

Court for the District of Nevada. See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This matter was referred to the

20

undersigned for consideration.

21

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

22

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); LR IB 3-2(b). If a

23

party timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court “shall

24

make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which

25

objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); LR IB 3-2(b). If a party fails to object, however, the

26

court is not required to conduct any review at all. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985);

1
United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[T]he district judge must
2
review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but
3
not otherwise. . . . Neither the Constitution nor the statute requires a district judge to review, de
4
novo, findings and recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct.”). Thus,
5
absent an objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, a court may accept the
6
recommendation without review.
7
Here, no objection has been filed, which relieves this Court of its obligation to review
8
Judge Foley’s Report and Recommendation.
9
Nonetheless, this Court finds it appropriate to conduct a de novo review of the record in
10
this case in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Local Rule IB 3-2 to determine whether to
11
adopt Judge Foley’s Report and Recommendation.

Upon reviewing the Report and

12
Recommendation and underlying facts, this Court determines that the Report and
13
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Foley should be accepted and adopted in full. On June 20,
14
2014, Plaintiff Docouto was ordered, and given thirty days, to either file an amended application
15
to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee. Doc. 10. More than eighty days later,
16
Docouto has neither filed, nor paid, nor requested more time in which to respond.
17
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
18
Recommendation entered July 25, 2014 (Doc. 11) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. The case is
19
dismissed with prejudice.
20

DATED this 21st day of November, 2014.

21
22
23
24
25

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
2