McInerney v. State of Nevada et al
ORDER - The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 4 ) is accepted and adopted in its entirety. It is ordered that Plaintiff's § 1983 claim against Defendant the Eighth Judicial District Court is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/3/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:16-cv-00698-MMD-GWF
EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, et
ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge George Foley, Jr. (ECF No. 4) (“R&R”) relating to Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed
In Forma Pauperis and pro se complaint. Plaintiff had until March 29, 2017, to file an
objection. 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 Foley’s R&R. The Magistrate Judge
recommends dismissing Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim against the Eighth Judicial District Court
with prejudice. (ECF No. 4.) Upon reviewing the R&R and the records in this case, this
Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R in full.
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr. (ECF No. 4) is accepted and
adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim against Defendant the Eighth Judicial
District Court is dismissed with prejudice.
DATED THIS 3rd day of May 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?