Roper v. State of Nevada et al
ORDER - Judge Baldwin's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 5 ) is accepted and adopted in full. This case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 9/16/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HKL)
Case 3:22-cv-00314-MMD-CLB Document 6 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 3:22-cv-00314-MMD-CLB
STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
Pro se Plaintiff Gene Roper brings this action against Defendants under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 for excessive force, retaliation, and false imprisonment. (ECF No. 1-1.) Before the
Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge
Carla L. Baldwin (ECF No. 5), recommending that the Court dismiss the case based on
Roper’s failure to update his address. Objections to the R&R were due September 13,
2022. To date, no objection has been filed. For this reason, and as explained below, the
Court adopts the R&R in full.
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party
fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to
conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,
1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and
recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the
findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory
Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no
clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”).
Case 3:22-cv-00314-MMD-CLB Document 6 Filed 09/16/22 Page 2 of 2
Because there was no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and
is satisfied that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. Judge Baldwin correctly found that the
case should be dismissed because Roper failed to update his address. In an order on
July 25, 2022, Judge Baldwin directed Roper to update his address by August 24, 2022,
because the Nevada Department of Corrections inmate database showed that Roper was
no longer incarcerated. (ECF No. 3.) Judge Baldwin also warned Roper that his case may
be dismissed if he failed to update his address by the deadline. (Id.) To date, Roper has
failed to change his address or otherwise respond to Judge Baldwin’s July 25, 2022,
order. This action cannot realistically proceed without Roper’s participation or until and
unless Roper updates his address. It is also Roper’s responsibility to notify the Court of
any change in his address. See LR IA 3-1 (requiring pro se litigants to keep the Court
apprised of their address, or face dismissal). The Court will therefore adopt Judge
Baldwin’s R&R in full and dismiss the case without prejudice.
It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 5) is accepted and adopted in full.
It is further ordered that this case is dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.
DATED THIS 16th Day of September 2022.
MIRANDA M. DU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?