Cole v. Allied Interstate LLc and Educational Credit Management Corporation et al

Filing 9

ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendations re 7 Report and Recommendation consistent with the foregoing and that all claims except the first be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 1/13/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

DERRICK VERNON COLE,

Case No. 2:16-CV-2487 JCM (NJK)

8
9
10

Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
ALLIED INTERSTATE LLC, et al.,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation

14

(“R&R”). (ECF No. 7). No objections have been filed, and the deadline for filing objections has

15

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
2

Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine
whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate.

3

The magistrate recommends that all claims in pro se plaintiff Derrick Cole’s complaint

4

(ECF No. 6), except the first claim, be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of

5

Civil Procedure 21. (ECF No. 7). In a previous order, the magistrate screened plaintiff’s complaint

6

and granted him leave to file an amended complaint by January 3, 2017. (ECF No. 5). On January

7

3, 2017, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (ECF No. 8).

8

In light of the amended complaint filed, the recommendation to dismiss claims in the

9

original complaint is now moot. Nonetheless, to the extent that the R&R has not been mooted by

10

the amended complaint, the court finds that good cause appears to ADOPT the magistrate’s

11

findings.

12

Accordingly,

13

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

14

Koppe’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 7) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED

15

consistent with the foregoing and that all claims except the first be dismissed without prejudice.

16
17
18

DATED January 13, 2017.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-