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)
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?