Tagle v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 11

ORDER. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3 ) is accepted and adopted in full. It is further ordered that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1 ) is denied. Plaintiff must pay the full filing fee within thirty (30) days. Payment of filing fees due 11/22/2017. Plaintiff's failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/23/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 10 11 VICTOR TAGLE, Case No. 3:17-cv-00510-MMD-WGC Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEVADA, et. al., 12 ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB Defendants. 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 Plaintiff’s 16 application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff timely filed his objections to the R&R 17 on September 6, 2017 (ECF Nos. 4, 5).1 18 This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 19 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 20 timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is 21 required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and 22 recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails 23 to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue 24 that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 25 In light of Plaintiff’s objections, the Court has engaged in a de novo review to 26 determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cobb’s recommendation. The Magistrate 27 Judge correctly found that the Court has dismissed civil actions initiated by Plaintiff in at 28 1Plaintiff filed two objections that appear almost identical. (ECF Nos. 4, 5.) 1 least three cases, and that Plaintiff’s proposed complaint does not plausibly allege he is 2 under imminent danger or serious physical injuries. (ECF No. 3 at 2.) Accordingly, the 3 Magistrate Judge recommends denying Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 4 pauperis. Upon reviewing the Recommendation and the proposed complaint, this Court 5 finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation in full. 6 It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and 7 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) is accepted and 8 adopted in full. 9 It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF 10 No. 1) is denied. Plaintiff must pay the full filing fee within thirty (30) days. Plaintiff’s 11 failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action. 12 DATED THIS 23rd day of October 2017. 13 14 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?