Fosmo v. County of Elko, Nevada et al

Filing 39

ORDER accepting and adopting # 38 Report and Recommendation : Defendant David Goff's Motion to Quash Service and-or Motion to Dismiss (## 21 , 22 ) is denied. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/15/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9
10
11
12
13

RYAN FOSMO,

Case No. 3:14-cv-00468-MMD-VPC
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
VALERIE P. COOKE

COUNTY OF ELKO, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

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

16

Judge Valerie P. Cooke (dkt. no. 38) (“R&R”) relating to Defendant David Goff’s (“Goff”)

17

Motion to Quash Service And-Or Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. nos. 21, 22.) Goff had until

18

July 11, 2015, to object to the R&R. No objection has 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).

26

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

27

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

28

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

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F.

7

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

8

which no objection was filed).

9

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

10

determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cooke’s R&R. The Magistrate Judge

11

recommended that Goff’s Motion to Quash Service and-or Motion to Dismiss (dkt. nos.

12

21, 22) be denied. Upon reviewing the R&R and the records before the Court, this Court

13

finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R in full.

14

It

is

therefore

ordered,

adjudged

and

decreed

that

the

Report

and

15

Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (dkt. no. 38) is accepted and

16

adopted in its entirety.

17
18
19

It is ordered that Defendant David Goff’s Motion to Quash Service and-or Motion
to Dismiss (dkt. nos. 21, 22) is denied.
DATED THIS 15th day of July 2015.

20
21
22

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2