Greene v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 86

ORDER that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 79 ) is ADOPTED and ACCEPTED; Intervenors' Motion to Intervene (ECF No. 69 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 5/28/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT CCOURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 5 6 ARTHUR BERAHA, 7 8 Plaintiff, vs. 9 10 STATE OF NEVADA, et al., Defendants. 11 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 3:17-CV-00366-RCJ-CBC ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF NO. 79) 12 13 14 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin Carry (ECF No. 79 1) entered on May 8, 2019, recommending that 15 16 the Court deny the Intervenors’ Motion to Intervene (ECF No. 69). On May 22, 2019, 17 the proposed Intervenor filed his Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Report and 18 Recommendation (ECF No. 82). 19 This action was referred to Magistrate Judge Carry under 28 U.S.C. § 20 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District 21 22 23 24 25 Court for the District of Nevada. The Court has conducted its de novo review in this case, has fully considered the pleadings and memoranda of the parties including the parties’ objections to the Report and Recommendation and other relevant matters to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 26 27 28 Rule IB 3-2. 1 Refers to Court’s docket number. 1 1 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that United States Magistrate Judge Carry’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 79), shall be ADOPTED and ACCEPTED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Intervenors’ Motion to Intervene (ECF No. 69). 4 5 6 7 Is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 28th day of May, 2019. 8 9 10 ROBERT C. JONES Senior District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 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?