Batiste v. Leavitte
ORDER accepting and adopting ECF No. 3 R&R; directing Clerk to detach and file ECF No. 1 -1 Complaint; dismissing with prejudice this action; directing Clerk to close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 4/27/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:17-cv-00217-MMD-NJK
JUDGE MICHELLE LEAVITT,
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
NANCY J. KOPPE
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation) (ECF No. 3), regarding Plaintiff’s request
to proceed in forma pauperis and proposed complaint (ECF Nos. 1, 1-1). Plaintiff had until
February 10, 2017 to file his objection. (ECF No. 3.) To date, no objection has been filed.
This 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). Where a party
timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is
required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and
recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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 United
States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review
employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no
objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D.
Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that
district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an objection”).
Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then the court may
accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226
(accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no objection
Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review in order
to determine whether to adopt the R&R. Upon review of the R&R and the proposed
complaint in this case, the Court agrees with the R&R and will adopt it in full.
It is hereby ordered that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 3) is accepted and adopted.
It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1-
It is further ordered that this action is dismissed with prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to close this case.
DATED THIS 27th day of April 2017.
MIRANDA M. DU
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?