Sanchez v. Rigney

Filing 43

ORDERED that Judge Baldwin's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 35 ) is accepted and adopted in full. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 23 ) is granted. Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by District Judge Anne R. Traum on 3/26/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5
6
7
8
9

JASMINE PAUL SANCHEZ,
v.

Case No. 3:22-cv-00109-ART-CLB
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 35)
AND GRANTING MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 23)

CHET RIGNEY,
Defendant.

10
11

Pro se Plaintiff Jasmine Paul Sanchez, an inmate at Ely State Prison,

12

brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Chet Rigney

13

alleging sexual harassment and excessive force. Before the Court is the Report

14

and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin

15

(ECF No. 35), recommending the Court grant Defendant’s motion for summary

16

judgment. Mr. Sanchez originally had until September 20, 2023 to file an

17

objection to Judge Baldwin’s R&R and was given an extension to March 15,

18

2024. (See ECF Nos. 35 at 12; 40.) As of today, no objection has been filed. For

19

this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R and grants

20

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

21

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

22

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

23

a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not

24

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

25

an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v.

26

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the

27

magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one

28

or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis
1

1

in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that

2

the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the

3

record in order to accept the recommendation.”).

4

Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review

5

and is satisfied Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. Judge Baldwin recommends

6

summary judgment in favor of Defendant because there is no genuine issue of

7

material fact as to whether Mr. Sanchez was subject to sexual harassment or

8

excessive force. Mr. Sanchez has provided the Court with no evidence to support

9

his claims, has not contested Defendant’s motion, and has not objected to Judge

10

Baldwin’s R&R. Further, the evidence provided by Defendant demonstrates that

11

the instances of which Mr. Sanchez complains do not constitute sexual

12

harassment or excessive force, as a matter of law.
Having reviewed the R&R and the record in this case, the Court is satisfied

13
14

that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err and adopts the R&R in full.
It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation

15
16

(ECF No. 35) is accepted and adopted in full.
It is further ordered that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF

17
18

No. 23) is granted.
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this

19
20

case.

21
22

Dated this 26th day of March 2024.

23
24
25
26

ANNE R. TRAUM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
2