Monroe v. Walker et al

Filing 37

ORDER accepting and adopting ECF No. 35 Report and Recommendation; dismissing without prejudice this action; directing Clerk to close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 2/14/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 RONALD MONROE, Case No. 3:14-cv-00515-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 12 CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WALKER, et al., ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB Defendants. 13 14 15 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 16 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 35) (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) relating to 17 Defendant Correctional Officer Walker’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 33.) Plaintiff had 18 until November 27, 2016, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R has been 19 filed. 20 This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 21 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 22 timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is 23 required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and 24 recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails 25 to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue 26 that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 27 Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a 28 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See 1 United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard 2 of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to 3 which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 4 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the 5 view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an 6 objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then 7 the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. 8 Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to 9 which no objection was filed). 10 Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to 11 determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cobb’s R&R. The R&R recommends 12 dismissal pursuant to LSR2-2 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) because Plaintiff has failed to 13 notify the Court of his change of address and has not made contact with Defendant or 14 the Court since he filed his last notice of change of address in October 2015. (ECF No. 15 24.) Plaintiff filed his previous notice of change of address on October 23, 2015, and 16 Defendant’s answer and the scheduling order that were served on Plaintiff in March 17 2016, were returned as undeliverable. (ECF Nos. 33-1, 32.) On November 28, 2016, 18 Plaintiff notified the Court of his new address and stated that he has been paralyzed 19 since May 10, 2016. (ECF No. 36.) Even accepting Plaintiff’s representation as to his 20 medical condition,1 Plaintiff does not explain his failure to update his address for months 21 before May 2016, or to contact Defendant during that time. Upon reviewing the R&R and 22 the filings in this case, this Court finds good cause to accept and adopt the Magistrate 23 Judge’s R&R in full. 24 It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and 25 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 35) is accepted and 26 adopted. 27 28 1The medical records attached to Plaintiff’s notice indicate that he was admitted to Mountain’s Edge Hospital on July 26, 2016 and discharged on August 17, 2016. (ECF No. 36-1.) He was admitted at a rehabilitation center on August 19 and 27, 2016. (Id.) 2 1 It is further ordered that this action is dismissed without prejudice. 2 The Clerk is directed to close this case. 3 DATED THIS 14th day of February 2017. 4 5 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?