Emirt v. United States Department of Agriculture et al
ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendations re 6 Report and Recommendation. This case is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 1/4/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
RONALD SATISH EMRIT,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, et al.,
Case No. 2:16-cv-02703-APG-NJK
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND
DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT
(ECF No. 6)
On December 2, 2016, Magistrate Judge Koppe issued a report and recommendation
recommending that I dismiss this case without prejudice because plaintiff Ronald Emrit did not
follow the required procedures imposed by Chief Judge Navarro’s orders declaring him a
vexatious litigant. ECF No. 6. Emrit did not file an objection. Thus, I am not obligated to
conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring
district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified
proposed findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,
1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings
and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)).
I nevertheless conducted a de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Judge Koppe sets forth
the proper legal analysis and factual basis for the decision.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation (ECF
No. 6) is accepted. This case is dismissed without prejudice.
DATED this 4th day of January, 2017.
ANDREW P. GORDON
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?