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)

Download PDF
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

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?