Morris v. Nevada Gaming Control Board et al

Filing 5

ORDER that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke ECF No. 3 is accepted and adopted in its entirety; Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ECF No. 3 is granted; the Clerk file the complaint ECF No. 1 -1; the complaint is dismissed with prejudice; Clerk is instructed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/10/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 BRENT MORRIS, Case No. 3:16-cv-00604-MMD-VPC Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 NEVADA GAMING CONTROL BOARD, 12 ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE VALERIE P. COOKE Defendant. 13 14 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 15 Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 4) (“R&R”) relating to Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed 16 In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 17 recommends granting plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing 18 the complaint with prejudice. Plaintiff filed his objection thereto on July 19, 2017 (ECF 19 No. 4). The R&R 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). 25 In light of plaintiff’s objections, the Court has engaged in a de novo review to 26 determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cooke’s recommendations. Judge Cooke 27 found that Plaintiff filed two nearly identical cases in this district: Morris v. Orleans Hotel 28 and Casino, case no. 2:12-cv-01683-JCM-CWH; and Morris v. Caberto, case no. 2:16- 1 cv-02416-GMN-NJK. (ECF No. 3 at 3.) Plaintiff contends that this Court granted him 2 leave to file claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the Court dismissed his petition for writ 3 of habeas corpus in case no. 3:16-cv-00212-MMD-WGC. (ECF No. 4 at 4.) In that case, 4 the Court dismissed the petition and noted that petitioner “may have a claim that is 5 cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983” and directed the Clerk to send petitioner the proper 6 civil rights complaint form. (Moriss v. Baca, case no. 3:16-cv-00212-MMD-WGC (ECF 7 No. 6 at 1-2).) However, the Court did not grant leave for Plaintiff file duplicative actions 8 as he has done by initiating this action. Therefore, this Court finds good cause to adopt 9 the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation in full for the reasons articulated in the R&R. 10 It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and 11 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 3) is accepted and 12 adopted in its entirety. 13 14 It is ordered that Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 3) is granted. 15 It is further ordered that the Clerk file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1) 16 It is further ordered that the complaint is dismissed with prejudice. 17 The Clerk is instructed to close this case. 18 DATED THIS 10th day of October 2017. 19 20 21 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 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?