Umoren v. United States of America

Filing 6

ORDER that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation ECF No. 5 is accepted and adopted; that this action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and the petition to quash summons ECF No. 3 is denied; Clerk directed to close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 07/26/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

KING ISAAC UMOREN,

10
11
12
13

Case No. 2:17-cv-01353-MMD-NJK
Plaintiff,

v.
UNITED STATES,

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NANCY J. KOPPE

Defendant.

14
15

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe’s Report and

16

Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation) (ECF No. 5), regarding Plaintiff’s Petition

17

to Quash IRS Summons. (ECF Nos. 5.) Plaintiff had until July 24, 2017 to object. (Id.) To

18

date, no objections have been filed.

19

This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

20

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party

21

timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is

22

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and

23

recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails

24

to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue

25

that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed,

26

the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate

27

judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United

28

States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review

1

employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no

2

objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D.

3

Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that

4

district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an objection”).

5

Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then the court may

6

accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226

7

(accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no objection

8

was filed).

9

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review in order

10

to determine whether to adopt the R&R. Upon review of the R&R and filings in this case,

11

the Court agrees with the R&R and will adopt it in full.

12
13
14
15
16

It is hereby ordered that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 5) is accepted and adopted.
It is further ordered that this action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and the
petition to quash summons (ECF No. 3) is denied.
The Clerk is directed to close this case.

17
18

DATED THIS 26th day of July 2017.

19
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2