Palmer v. State Bar of Nevada et al

Filing 4

ORDER accepting and adopting in its entirety ECF No. 3 Report and Recommendation; granting ECF No. 1 IFP application - NDOC to pay Clerk from inmate account (copy of order sent to Finance and NDOC Chief of Inmate Services); directing Clerk to file the complaint; dismissing with prejudice the complaint; directing Clerk to enter judgment and close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/11/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 MARKIECE PALMER, Case No. 3:16-cv-00248-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 STATE BAR OF NEVADA, et al., ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB 10 Defendants. 11 12 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 13 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) (“R&R”) relating to plaintiff’s application to proceed 14 in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff had until 15 August 20, 2016, to file an objection. No objection to the R&R has been filed. 16 This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 17 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 18 timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is 19 required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and 20 recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails 21 to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue 22 that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 23 Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a 24 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See 25 United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard 26 of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to 27 which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 28 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the 1 view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an 2 objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then 3 the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. 4 Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to 5 which no objection was filed). 6 Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to 7 determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cobb’s R&R. Upon reviewing the R&R 8 and proposed complaint, this Court finds good cause to accept and adopt the Magistrate 9 Judge’s R&R in full. 10 It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and 11 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) is accepted and 12 adopted in its entirety. 13 It is further ordered that plaintiff’s application to proceed in form pauperis (ECF 14 No. 1) is granted; however, pursuant to pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), he is still required 15 to pay the full amount of the filing fee over time. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this 16 order, Plaintiff will be required to pay an initial partial filing fee of $12.00. Thereafter, Plaintiff 17 will be required to make monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding month’s 18 income credited to his account to be forwarded by the agency having custody over Plaintiff 19 to the Clerk of this Court each time the amount in Plaintiff’s account exceeds $10 until the 20 $350 filing fee is paid. 21 It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 22 It is further ordered that the complaint is dismissed with prejudice. 23 The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close 24 25 this case. DATED THIS 11th day of October 2016. 26 27 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?