Mwanza v. Foster et al

Filing 110

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 106 Report and Recommendation; ORDER denying 86 Motion for Summary Judgment Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 12/28/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - WJ)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9

***

10
11
12
13

TACUMA J. M’WANZA,

Case No. 3:14-cv-331-MMD-WGC
Plaintiff,

v.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOSTER, et al.,

ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WILLIAM G. COBB

Defendants.

14
15
16

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate

17

Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 106) (“R&R”) recommending denial of Defendants’

18

Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 86). Defendants had until October 3, 2017 to

19

object. (ECF No. 106.) On October 3, 2017, Defendants moved for an extension of time

20

to December 1, 2017 to file their objection. (ECF No. 108.) The Court granted

21

Defendants’ request in part and extended the deadline to November 6, 2017. (ECF No.

22

109.) To date, Defendants have not filed an objection.

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

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

28

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

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to

6

which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

7

1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna–Tapia as adopting

8

the view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of

9

an objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation,

10

then the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone,

11

263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s

12

recommendation to which no objection was filed).

13

While Defendants have not objected to the R&R, the Court has nevertheless

14

conducted a de novo review to determine whether to adopt the R&R. Having reviewed

15

the R&R and the briefs relating to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court

16

the Court agrees with the Magistrate and will adopt the R&R.

17

It

is

therefore

ordered,

adjudged

and

decreed

that

the

Report

and

18

Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 106) is accepted and

19

adopted in full.

20
21
22

It is further ordered that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 86)
is denied.
DATED THIS 28th day of December 2017.

23
24
25

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28
2