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).

Download PDF
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

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?