McKee v. Riverwood et al

Filing 16

ORDERED adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 12 ) is accepted and adopted in its entirety. Plaintiff's IFP application (ECF No. 1 ) is granted; plaintiff will not be required to pay an initial fee. Clerk shall deta ch and file the complaint (ECF No. 1 -1). The complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/11/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 ANNETTE A. MCKEE, Case No. 3:16-cv-00311-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 12 13 GRESELDA, ELIA LOPEZ, KROMER INVESTMETNS, RIVERWOOD, ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB Defendants. 14 15 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 16 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 12) (“R&R”) relating to plaintiff’s application to 17 proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff 18 had until August 21, 2016, to file an objection. No objection to the R&R 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 24 fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any 25 issue 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. 28 See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the 1 standard of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and 2 recommendation to which no objections were mad2e); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 3 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in 4 Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review “any 5 issue that is not the subject of an objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a 6 magistrate judge’s recommendation, then the court may accept the recommendation 7 without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without 8 review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to 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. Upon reviewing the R&R 11 and proposed complaint, this Court finds good cause to accept and adopt the 12 Magistrate Judge’s R&R in full. 13 It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and 14 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 12) is accepted and 15 adopted in its entirety. 16 17 It is ordered that plaintiff’s application to proceed in form pauperis (ECF No. 1) is granted; plaintiff will not be required to pay an initial fee. 18 It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 19 It is further ordered that the complaint be dismissed with prejudice. 20 The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close 21 22 this case. DATED THIS 11th day of October 2016. 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?