Ferguson v. President et al

Filing 6

ORDER that Judge Cobb's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 4 ) is accepted and adopted in full; Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1 ) is granted; Clerk directed to file the Complaint (ECF No. 1 -1); this action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim; Clerk directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 8/5/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

WILLIAM FERGUSON,

Case No. 3:19-cv-00134-MMD-WGC

7
8
9

Plaintiff,
JUDGE,
Defendant.

10
11

ORDER

v.

Before

the

Court

is

the

Report

and

Recommendation

(“R&R”

or

12

“Recommendation”) of United States Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 4),

13

recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application (ECF No. 1),

14

file the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1), and dismiss the action with prejudice for failure to state

15

a claim. Plaintiff had until July 25, 2019, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the

16

R&R has been filed.1 For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R.

17

This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

18

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party

19

timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the Court is

20

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and

21

recommendation] to which objection is made.” Id. Where a party fails to object, however,

22

the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the

23

subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth

24
25
26
27
28

1The

copy of the Report and Recommendation sent to Plaintiff was returned as
undeliverable (ECF No. 5), but Plaintiff has an ongoing obligation to apprise the Court of
his address. LR IA 3-1 (“An attorney or pro se party must immediately file with the court
written notification of any change of mailing address, email address, telephone number,
or facsimile number. The notification must include proof of service on each opposing party
or the party’s attorney. Failure to comply with this rule may result in the dismissal of the
action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the
court.”).

1

Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s

2

report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v.

3

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review

4

employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no

5

objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D.

6

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

7

district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”).

8

Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then the Court may

9

accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at

10

1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no

11

objection was filed).

12

While Plaintiff has failed to object to Judge Cobb’s recommendation, the Court will

13

conduct a de novo review to determine whether to adopt the R&R. Judge Cobb found that

14

Plaintiff’s Complaint—containing delusional scenarios and disjointed statements with no

15

basis in law or fact—is frivolous. (ECF No. 4 at 4.) Having reviewed the R&R and the

16

Complaint, the Court agrees with Judge Cobb.
It is therefore ordered that Judge Cobb’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No.

17
18

4) is accepted and adopted in full.
It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF

19
20

No. 1) is granted.

21

It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court file the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1).

22

It is further ordered that this action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a

23

claim.

24

It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court close this case.

25

DATED THIS 5th day of August 2019.

26
27
28

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE