DuBose v. Hilton Grand Vacations Club, LLC

Filing 45

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the 44 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the 8 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff in the form of Defendant's attorneys' fees and costs incurred in preparing the motion to compel. The Court kindly directs the Clerk of Court to close the case. This case is now closed. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/27/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AMMi)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 BARBARA DUBOSE, 4 5 6 7 8 Plaintiff, Case No.: 2:24-cv-00648-GMN-DJA vs. HILTON GRAND VACATIONS CLUB, LLC., ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Defendant. 9 10 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF No. 44), 11 of United States Magistrate Daniel J. Albregts. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has disengaged 12 from this case, resulting in the Court granting in part a motion for sanctions. (See Order, ECF 13 No. 42). In that Order, the Court declined to enter sanctions, but ordered Plaintiff to show 14 cause why the Court should not impose the sanctions that Defendant requested. (Id.). Plaintiff 15 did not respond to the order to show cause, and Magistrate Judge Albregts now recommends 16 the dismissal of this action and the imposition of sanctions. 17 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 18 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 19 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 20 determination of those portions to which objections are made if the Magistrate Judge’s findings 21 and recommendations concern matters that may not be finally determined by a magistrate 22 judge. D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 23 findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. 24 IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any 25 review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. Page 1 of 2 1 140, 149 (1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a 2 district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s R&R where no objections have been 3 filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 4 5 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See R&R, ECF No. 44) (setting a January 24, 2025 deadline for objections). 6 Accordingly, 7 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 44), is 8 ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 8), is denied as 11 12 13 MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff in the form of Defendant’s attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in preparing the motion to compel. 14 The Court kindly directs the Clerk of Court to close the case. 15 Dated this ____ 27 day of January, 2025. 16 17 18 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge United States District Court 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 2 of 2

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?