Dean v. Donnelly et al

Filing 29

ORDER accepting and adopting in its entirety ECF No. 28 R&R; granting Defendant Maria Ward's ECF No. 20 Motion for Summary Judgment; directing Clerk to enter judgment and close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/1/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9
10

CHARLES DEAN,

Case No. 3:15-cv-00421-MMD-WGC
Plaintiff,

11
v.

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WILLIAM G. COBB

12
DR. DONNELLY, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15

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

16

Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 28) (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) relating to

17

Defendant Maria Ward’s (“Ward”) Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 20). Plaintiff

18

had until March 13, 2017, to object to the R&R. To date, no objection to the R&R has

19

been 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 Recommendation. The Magistrate

12

Judge recommends granting summary judgment in favor of Ward. Upon reviewing the

13

Recommendation and the underlying briefs, this Court finds good cause to adopt the

14

Magistrate Judge’s R&R in full.

15

It

is

therefore

ordered,

adjudged

and

decreed

that

the

Report

and

16

Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 28) is accepted and

17

adopted in its entirety.

18

It is ordered that Defendant Maria Ward’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF

19

No. 20) is granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order

20

and close this case.

21

DATED THIS 1st day of May 2017.

22
23
24

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
27
28
2