Wallace v. State of California et al

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. No objections have been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 6 . The Court ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendation 6 . IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Robert C. Jones on 10/7/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

.

FIED
L
E gjsa
Ny y

1
2

3

REcsgga
so yo (N
)
COUNS A AR ISOFRK ORD
EI TE

gg' jjz j
r
gj

4

5
6

UNI
TED STATES D

7

BY
:

Q ERKUsDl m m com r
s'
Dl' c'oFNE
sr r
ql
yAnA
-' . R. - - ..-.- - DEPUFY
T
-

.

DI
STRI O F NEVADA
CT

8 JO HN W I AM W ALLACE,
LLI

9
1
0

Pl nif
aitf,

3: CV11- 0278- VPC)
RCJ(

v.

O RDER
11

STATE O F CALI RNI ,etaI
FO
A
.
12

Def
endant
s.

'

' '' ' -. 5
'

13
1
4

1
5

Be or t Cour i t Repor and Rec m endaton oft Unied St es M agi r e
f e he
t s he
t
om
i
he t
at
stat

1 Judge( No.6)u
6
ECF
(Recommendaton' ent edonAugus 22,2011,nwhi t Magitat
i ) er
t
i ch he
sr e
1 Judge r ommendst t sCourdi s t sact wihoutprj ce.
7
ec
hat hi
t smis hi i t
on
eudi
1
8
No obj i t t Rep tand Recommen i hasbeenfl
ecton o he or
daton
i
ed.
'
19

1 Dl
. scussl
uN

' '' '
'

20
21
22
23
2
4
25
26

Thi Coud u ac t rj t or modiy i wh e or i par,t fndi or
s
may cep, eec,
f, n ol
n t he i ngs
r ommen at smad b temagsr t * 8 U. C. 63 ( ( ) Fur er u d 2 U. C.
ec
d i
on
e yh
itae.2 S. j 6 b)1 . t , n er 8 S.
h
j636( ( ,ia padymakesa tmel obj ton t t magi r ej
b)1) f
i y eci o he
stat udge' r
s ecommen i
daton,
t t sCoud i r r t U
hen hi
s equied o makea de novodet mi i oft
er naton hose podi oft (epor
ons he r t
and r ommendat t whi obj i i made.l Nevedhel s,t st ut does not
ec
i o ch ect s
on)
on
'
es he at e
dequiel s I serr e by(hi Cour)
r r ) ome es eviw t s
twhennoobect ar fl NThomasv. n,
j i
ons e i
ed.
Ar 474
U. 1 1
S. 40, 49-50(
1985) l t undert sat e,hi Couri notr r t c ctu
. nsead,
he t ut t s
ts equied o ondu any

27

28

'

lForanobj i t betmel aparymus s v andfl iwihi 10daysaferbei
ect o i y, t
on
t ere
i t tn
e
t ng
s v wiht magitat j
ered t he
sr e udge' r
s epod andr
ecommendat 2 U. c. 6 6b() .
i 8 s. â 3 ()1(
on.
Cj
'

j

.

1 r e ataI.,. anyisuet i notte subectofanobeci n.xat1 Si l l t
eviw
I of s hats h
j
j ton. 1
#
49. mi y,he
ar
2 Ni hCicuihasr
nt r t ecogniedt adi rct t:notr r t r i amagitat j s
z hat sti couri
equied o evew
sr e udge'
3 r t r
eporand ecommendatonwher noobeci h beenfl SeeUniedSt esv.
i
e
j tons ave
i
ed.
t at Revna4 Tani 328 F. 111 ( h Ci.2003)( segar ngt sandar ofr ew empl byt
a,
3d 4 9t r
dir di he t
d evi
oyed he
5 dititc t
src ourwhenr ewi ar orandr ommendatont chnoobectonswer madel
evi ng ep t ec
i owhi
j i
e
;
6 seeal Schmi v.
so
dt Johnst 263F.
one,
supp. 1219,1226( Arz.
2d
D. i 2003)(eadi t Ni h
r ng he nt
7 C i ts deci on i Revn - api as adoptng t vi t di rctcouds ar notr r t
r '
cui
si n
a-r a
i he ew hat sti
e
equied o

'

.

8
9
1
0
11
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5

r ew ' i t i nott subec ofan obj ton.) Thus,it e i no obj tont a
evi any ssue hats he j t
eci n.
f her s
eci o
magitat udge' r ommendaton,hent sCoudmayacc t r ommendatonwi
sr ej
s ec
i t hi
epthe ec
i t
hout
r ew.Seee. ,
evi
q.Johnst 263F.
one,
supp. at1226(
2d
acceptng, t r ew, magitat
i wihoutevi a
sr e
j sr
udge' ecommendatont whi noobj i wasfl .
i o ch
ecton
i
ed)
I t scase,her hav beennoobect fl t t Magi r eJu sReporand
n hi
t e e
j i i o he
ons ed
stat dge'
t
Rec
dmmendaton.Alhough noobecinwasfl t sCour hasr ewed t Repor and
i
t
j t
o
i hi
ed,
t evi
he
t
Rec
ommendaton ( No.6)andaccept i.Ac di y,
i ECF
s t cor ngl
I I HEREBY ORDERED t t saci i DI SSED wihou pr udi
TS
hat hi ton s SMI
t t ej ce.

1
6

I I SO O RDERED.
T S

1
7

DATED :Thi 7t
s
h

day ofOct , 2011.
ober

1
8
1
9

2
0

'

R B Ty.J
Chi Di rét
ef sti

2l

22
23
24
25

26
27

28

2

S

r Judge
t