Didier v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Filing 13

ORDER adopting 10 Report and Recommendation; granting 5 Motion to proceed in forma pauperis; Complaint is dismissed without prejudice; Amended Complaint deadline: 30 days from entry of this order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 4/2/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

JAMES M. DIDIER,

8
9
10

Case No. 2:16-CV-2127 JCM (CWH)
Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, et al.,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation (ECF

14

No. 10) that plaintiff James Didier’s (“plaintiff”) motion to proceed in forma pauperis be granted

15

(ECF No. 5). No objections have been filed, and the deadline for filing objections has 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

No party has objected to the report and recommendation. Nevertheless, this court finds it

2

appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt the recommendation of

3

the magistrate judge. Upon reviewing the recommendation and underlying briefs, the court finds

4

that good cause appears to adopt the magistrate judge’s findings. Accordingly, the court will grant

5

plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss plaintiff’s complaint with leave to

6

amend for failure to articulate the court’s jurisdictional grounds.

7

Accordingly,

8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Magistrate Judge

9

Hoffman’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 10) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

its entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF
No. 5) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint (ECF Nos. 1, 11) be, and the same
hereby is, DISMISSED without prejudice consistent with the foregoing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have 30 days from the entry of this order
to file an amended complaint with the court.
DATED April 2, 2018.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-