George v. Haile

Filing 4

ORDER accepting and adopting in its entirety ECF No. 3 R&R; granting ECF No. 1 IFP application; directing Clerk to detach and file complaint; dismissing with prejudice the complaint; directing Clerk to close case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 4/25/2017. (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 LESLIE GEORGE, Case No. 3:16-cv-00616-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, 10 v. 11 TSIGE HAILE, ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB 12 Defendant`. 13 14 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 15 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) relating to plaintiff’s 16 application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1- 17 1). Plaintiff had until February 10, 2017, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the 18 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 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. Upon reviewing the R&R 11 and proposed complaint, this Court finds good cause to accept and adopt the Magistrate 12 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. 3) is accepted and 15 adopted in its entirety. 16 17 It is further ordered that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) is granted. 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 is dismissed with prejudice. 20 The Clerk is directed to close this case. 21 DATED THIS 25th day of April 2017. 22 23 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?