Young

Filing 9

ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Accepting and Adopting 4 Report and Recommendation. FURTHER ORDERED that Young's claims brought against Officer Kaylor and Officer Dyer pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1985, and 1983 DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Young's claims brought against Officer Kaylor and Officer Dyer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, and 245 are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 6/1/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

MICHAEL RAY YOUNG,

Case No. 2:17-cv-01062-RFB-VCF

8

Plaintiff,
ORDER

9
10

v.
STATE OF NEVADA,

11

Defendant.

12
13
14

Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 5) of the
Honorable Cam Ferenbach, United States Magistrate Judge, entered May 2, 2017.

15

A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

16

recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific

17

written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §

18

636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is

19

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed

20

findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local

21

Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct

22

“any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge.

23

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due

24

by May 16, 2017. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case

25

and concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations.

26

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 5) is

27

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

28

...

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Young’s claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§

2

1981, 1985, and 1983 against Officer Kaylor and Officer Dyer in their official capacities are

3

DISMISSED with prejudice.

4
5
6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Young’s claims brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 241,
242, and 245 against Officer Kaylor and Officer Dyer are DISMISSED with prejudice
The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff.

7
8

DATED: June 1, 2017.
_____________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-