Williams v. Smiles Today Dental

Filing 6

ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge Hoffman's 4 Report and Recommendation. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 3/27/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

DEONDRE WILLIAMS,

8
9
10
11

Case No. 2:14-CV-1014 JCM (CWH)
Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
SMILES TODAY DENTAL,
Defendant(s).

12
13

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation that

14

plaintiff Deondre Williams’ case be dismissed for failure to file an amended complaint by an

15

August 13, 2014, deadline. (ECF No. 4). No objection has been filed.

16

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

17

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party fails to object to a

18

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, however, the court is not required to conduct “any

19

review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,

20

149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review

21

a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United

22

States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review

23

employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no

24

objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003)

25

(reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna–Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are

26

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

27

This court agrees that a multi-year violation of a deadline to file an amended complaint is

28

adequate grounds for dismissal of the case without prejudice; furthermore, the balance of the five

James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

Ferdik factors clearly weighs in favor of dismissal. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260

2

(9th Cir. 1992); see also (ECF No. 4). Additionally, plaintiff was warned that a failure to comply

3

with the magistrate judge’s order may lead to the dismissal of his case. See (ECF Nos. 2, 4).

4

Accordingly,

5

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

6

recommendation of Magistrate Judge Hoffman (ECF No. 4) be, and the same hereby are,

7

ADOPTED in their entirety.

8

The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

9

DATED March 27, 2017.

10
11

__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-