Miller v. Steinheimer, et al
ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - Ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 5 ) is accepted and adopted in its entirety. plaintiff's application to p roceed in form pauperis (ECF No. 1 ) is denied. Clerk shall detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1 -1). The complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 1/8/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
MARTIN KARI MILLER,
Case No. 3:16-cv-00317-MMD-VPC
CONNIE STEINHEIMER, et al.,
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
VALERIE P. COOKE
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 5) (“R&R”) relating to plaintiff’s application to proceed
in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and civil rights complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff had until
November 8, 2017, to file an objection. (ECF No. 5.) To date, no objection to the R&R
has been filed.
This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party
timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is
required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and
recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails
to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue
that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See
United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard
of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to
which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,
1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the
view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an
objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then
the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F.
Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to
which no objection was filed).
Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to
determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cook’s R&R.
recommends dismissing this action without prejudice based upon Plaintiff’s failure to
timely submit a completed application to proceed in forma paueris. (ECF No. 5.) Upon
reviewing the R&R and proposed complaint, this Court finds good cause to accept and
adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R in full.
The Magistrate Judge
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 5) is accepted and
adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that plaintiff’s application to proceed in form pauperis (ECF No. 1) is
It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1).
It is further ordered that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to close this case.
DATED THIS 8th day of January 2018.
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?