Pratt v. Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners

Filing 37

ORDER accepting and adopting in its entirety ECF No. 36 Report and Recommendation; dismissing without prejudice this case; denying as moot ECF No. 35 Motion to Dismiss; directing Clerk to close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/10/2017. (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 JACOB R. PRATT, Case No. 3:15-cv-00505-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 12 CHIEF PAROLE AND PROBATION OFFICER, 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. 36) (“R&R”) recommending dismissal of this action 17 without prejudice. Plaintiff had until July 5, 2017, to object to the R&R. To date, no 18 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 Cobb’s R&R. The Magistrate Judge 11 recommends permitting Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice. (ECF 12 No. 36.) Upon reviewing the R&R and records in this case, this Court finds good cause 13 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 William G. Cobb (ECF No. 36) is accepted and 16 adopted in its entirety. 17 It is ordered that this case is dismissed without prejudice. 18 It is further ordered that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (or Alternatively Motion for 19 Summary Judgment) (ECF No. 35) is denied as moot. 20 The Clerk is instructed to close this case. 21 DATED THIS 10th day of July 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?