Pathak v. Yahoo, Inc et al

Filing 29

ORDER that the 28 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. Plaintiff's 24 Renewed Motion for Default Judgment is DENIED and Plaintiff's claims against Defendant are DISMISSED. In light of the dismissal of claims a gainst the last remaining defendant, the Clerk of Court is instructed to close the case. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/29/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD) Modified to correct docket text on 1/29/2018 (SLD).

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
ANSHU PATHAK,
4
5
6
7

Plaintiff,
vs.
SPECIALTY MEATS AND GOURMET
LLC,

8

Defendant.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-02124-GMN-NJK
ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable United
States Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe, (ECF No. 28), which recommends that Plaintiff
Anshu Pathak’s (“Plaintiff”) renewed Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 24), be denied
and that claims against Defendant Specialty Meats and Gourmet LLC (“Defendant”) be
dismissed.
A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a
United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);
D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo
determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The 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); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). 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, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,
1122 (9th Cir. 2003).
Page 1 of 2

1

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.

2

Accordingly,

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 28), is

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s renewed Motion for Default Judgement,
(ECF No. 24), is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant are
DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in light of the dismissal of claims against the last
remaining defendant, the Clerk of Court is instructed to close the case.

11
12

29
DATED this ___day of January, 2018.

13
14
15
16
17

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

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2