Gettings v. CEBU Pacific et al

Filing 5

ORDER Adopting in its entirety Magistrate Judge Hoffman's 4 Report and Recommendation. This case is Dismissed without prejudice. The clerk shall enter judgment and close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/7/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

JIMMY GETTINGS,

8
9
10

Case No. 2:15-CV-767 JCM (CWH)
Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
CEBU PACIFIC, et al.,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13

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

14

(“R&R”). (ECF No. 4). No objections have been filed, and the deadline for filing objections has

15

now passed.

16

Plaintiff Jimmy Gettings was ordered to pay a filing fee within thirty (30) days after his

17

application to proceed in forma pauperis was denied. (ECF No. 3). The deadline for paying the

18

filing fee has since passed.

19

Magistrate Judge Hoffman cautioned plaintiff that failure to comply with the court’s order

20

to pay the filing fee would result in a recommendation to dismiss the underlying action. (ECF No.

21

2). Accordingly, because plaintiff has failed to comply, the magistrate recommends that the case

22

be dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 4).

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

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

7

objections were made).

8
9

Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine
whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

Upon reviewing the

10

recommendation and underlying briefs, this court finds that good cause appears to ADOPT the

11

magistrate judge’s findings.

12

Accordingly,

13

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Magistrate Judge

14

Hoffman’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 4) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in its

15

entirety.

16
17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

18

The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

19

DATED September 7, 2016.

20
21

__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-