Swinton v. Goodwill Industries Inc

Filing 30

ORDER that the R&R (ECF No. 27 ) is accepted and adopted in its entirety; this action is dismissed for plaintiff's failure to comply with LR IA 3-1; Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9 ) and motion to strike (ECF No. 16 ) are denied as moot; clerk directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 3/12/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

MICHAEL A. SWINTON,

Case No. 3:17-cv-00123-MMD-VPC
Plaintiff,

10
v.
11

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, INC.,

ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
VALERIE P. COOKE

12
Defendant.
13
14

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate

15

Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 27) (“R&R”). No objection to the R&R has been filed.1

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
28

1The

R&R (ECF No. 27) that was mailed to Plaintiff was returned as
undeliverable. (ECF No. 28.)

1

which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219,

2

1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the

3

view that district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an

4

objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then

5

the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F.

6

Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to

7

which no objection was filed).

8

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to

9

determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cooke’s R&R. The R&R recommends that

10

this action be dismissed with prejudice based upon Plaintiff’s failure to notify the court of

11

his change of address pursuant to LR IA 3-1. The R&R (ECF No. 27) that was mailed to

12

Plaintiff was returned as undeliverable. (ECF No. 28.) Upon reviewing the R&R and

13

records in this case, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R in

14

full.
It

15

is

therefore

ordered,

adjudged

and

decreed

that

the

Report

and

16

Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 27) is accepted and

17

adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that this action is dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to comply with LR IA

18
19
20
21

3-1.
It is further ordered that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) and motion to
strike (ECF No. 16) are denied as moot.

22

The Clerk is directed to close this case.

23

DATED THIS 12th day of March 2018.

24
25
26

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
2