Harrell v. Circle K et al
Filing
7
ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge Leen's 5 Report and Recommendation. The instant case is Dismissed without prejudice. The clerk shall close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 4/21/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
MATTHEW L. HARRELL,
8
9
10
Case No. 2:15-CV-2359 JCM (PAL)
Plaintiff(s),
ORDER
v.
CIRCLE K CLERK, et al.,
11
Defendant(s).
12
13
Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Leen’s report and recommendation
14
(“R&R”). (ECF No. 5). No objections have been filed, and the deadline for filing objections has
15
since passed.
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). Where a party timely objects
18
to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de novo
19
determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made.”
20
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
21
Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at
22
all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
23
(1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a
24
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United
25
States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review
26
employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no
27
objections were made).
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine
2
whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Upon reviewing the
3
recommendation and underlying filings, the court finds that good cause appears to adopt the
4
magistrate judge’s findings.
5
The magistrate judge found that plaintiff submitted a complaint, but failed to submit the
6
IFP application for incarcerated litigants or remit the $400.00 filing fee. (ECF No. 5). The
7
magistrate judge thus recommends that the instant action be dismissed without prejudice to
8
plaintiff’s ability to commence a new action in which plaintiff either pays the appropriate filing
9
fee in full or submits a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 5). The
10
court agrees.
11
Accordingly,
12
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Magistrate Judge Leen’s
13
14
15
R&R (ECF No. 5) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in its entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the instant case be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
16
The clerk shall close the case.
17
DATED April 21, 2017.
18
19
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?