Banks v. Direct Loans Servicing Center et al

Filing 6

ORDER adopting in full 3 Report and Recommendations. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis 1 is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiffs Complaint ( 1 -1). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice due to the principle of res judicata. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close case. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 11/21/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DKJ)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***
9
10

ANTOINETTE BANKS,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13

Case No.: 2:14-cv-00563-RFB-GWF

v.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT &
RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE
JUDGE GEORGE W. FOLEY, JR.

DIRECT LOANS SERVICING CENTER, et al,

14

Defendants.
15
16
17

Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 3) of the
Honorable George W. Foley, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, entered June 16, 2014.

18

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

19

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific

20

written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §

21

636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is

22

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed

23

findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local

24

Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct

25

1

“any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge.

2

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

3

Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by July 3, 2014. No objections have

4

been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the Magistrate

5

Judge’s recommendation(s) that Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No.1) is

6

granted. Plaintiff shall not be required to pre-pay the full filing fee of four hundred dollars

7

($400.00); that Plaintiff is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity

8

of prepayment of any additional fees or costs or the giving of security therefor. This Order

9

granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the issuance of subpoenas at

10

government expense; that the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1-1)

11

and that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice due to the principle of res judicata.

12

Therefore, the Court has determined that Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation should be

13

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

14
15

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No.1) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

16

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF

17

No.1) is granted. Plaintiff shall not be required to pre-pay the full filing fee of four hundred

18

dollars ($400.00).

19

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is permitted to maintain this action to

20

conclusion without the necessity of prepayment of any additional fees or costs or the giving of

21

security therefor. This Order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the

22

issuance of subpoenas at government expense.

23
24
25

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiff’s Complaint
(ECF No. 1-1).

1
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed with prejudice due
to the principle of res judicata.

3

The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close case.

4

DATED this 21st day of November, 2014.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

___________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II.
United States District Court Judge