Harden v. Nevada Department of Corrections et al

Filing 54

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 52 the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/23/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4
5
6
7
8

HAROLD D. HARDEN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:15-cv-00970-GMN-CWH
ORDER

10
11

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable United

12

States Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman, (ECF No. 52), which recommends that Plaintiff

13

Harold D. Harden’s case be dismissed without prejudice.

14

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a

15

United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);

16

D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo

17

determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject,

18

or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

19

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is

20

not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

21

objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized

22

that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

23

where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,

24

1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

25

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. Moreover, as
Page 1 of 2

1

explained by Judge Hoffman, Plaintiff is in violation of local rules by failing to provide notice

2

of a change of his mailing address. See LR IA 3-1. In light of the foregoing, dismissal of the

3

action is appropriate. Id.

4

Accordingly,

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 52), is

6

ADOPTED in full.

7

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

8

23
DATED this ___ day of January, 2018.

9
10
11

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2