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)
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?