Magnetic v. State of Nevada et al
ORDER accepting and adopting Report and Recommendations re ECF No. 8 ; this action is dismissed without prejudice; Clerk directed to close this case and enter judgment. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/23/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
INFINITE MASTER MAGNETIC, aka
JESSE JEROME POINTER,
Case No. 2:16-cv-00640-MMD-PAL
STATE OF NEVADA, et al,
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND
PEGGY A. LEEN
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Peggy A. Leen (ECF No. 8) (“R&R”) relating to plaintiff’s failure to comply with the
court’s order giving Plaintiff until April 29, 2016, to file an Application to Proceed in
Forma Pauperis or pay the filing fee of $400.00. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff was advised that a
failure to comply with that order would result in a recommendation to dismiss this action.
(Id.) As of this date, Plaintiff has not complied with the court’s order, and Magistrate
Judge Leen submitted her R&R on May 10, 2016. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff had until May 27,
2016, to object to the R&R. (Id.) To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed.
This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party
timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is
required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and
recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails
to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue
that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See
United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard
of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to
which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,
1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the
view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an
objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then
the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F.
Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to
which no objection was filed).
Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to
determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Leen’s R&R. Upon reviewing the R&R and
records in this case, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R in
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen (ECF No. 8) is accepted and
adopted in its entirety.
It is further ordered that this action is dismissed without prejudice to the Plaintiff’s
ability to commence a new action in which he either pays the appropriate filing fee in full
or submits a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.
It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court close this case and enter judgment
DATED THIS 23rd day of October 2017.
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?