Moreno v. United States Government

Filing 5

ORDER - It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwins Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 3 ) is accepted and adopted in full. It is further ordered that Morenos IFP Application (ECF No. 1 ) is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to file the Complaint (ECF No. 1 -1). The Clerk of Court is directed to send Moreno a copy of (1) this order and (2) the § 1983 civil rights complaint packet (inmate). 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. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 9/19/2022. (Attachments: # 1 1983 Complaint & Instructions)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CJS)

Download PDF
Case 3:22-cv-00374-MMD-CLB Document 5 Filed 09/19/22 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 *** 6 LORENZO MORENO, Plaintiff, 7 8 9 Case No. 3:22-cv-00374-MMD-CLB ORDER v. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, Defendant. 10 11 12 Pro se Plaintiff Lorenzo Moreno brings this action against Defendant under 42 13 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1-1.) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation 14 (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla L. Baldwin (ECF No. 3), recommending 15 that the Court grant Moreno’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1 (“IFP 16 Application”)), and dismiss the case because Moreno failed to state any colorable claims 17 in his Complaint (ECF Nos. 1-1, 3). Moreno’s objection to the R&R was due September 18 7, 2022. To date, no objection has been filed. 1 For this reason, and as explained below, 19 the Court adopts the R&R in full. 20 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 21 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 22 fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to 23 conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas 24 25 26 27 28 1The Court notes that Moreno filed a letter on September 8, 2022, stating that he did not want to proceed in forma pauperis, and requesting the appointment of two attorneys to help him with his Complaint. The Court will grant his IFP Application, so Moreno does not need to pay the filing fee. The Court denies Moreno’s request for counsel, since he failed to articulate any colorable claims in his Complaint. However, to the extent Moreno is struggling to navigate his lawsuit pro se, he can find resources at https://www.nvd.uscourts.gov/self-help/representing-yourself-assistance/. Case 3:22-cv-00374-MMD-CLB Document 5 Filed 09/19/22 Page 2 of 2 1 v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 2 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and 3 recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the 4 findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory 5 Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 6 clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 7 Because there was no objection to the R&R, the Court need not conduct de novo 8 review, and is satisfied that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. To start, Moreno’s IFP 9 Application will be granted because he is unable to pay the filing fee. (ECF Nos. 1, 3.) 10 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en 11 banc). 12 incomprehensible, confusing, and contains conclusory and vague statements. (ECF Nos. 13 1-1, 3.) The Court is unable to identify the legal or factual basis for his claims, and the 14 relief sought. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) (“A pleading that states a claim for relief must 15 contain . . . a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled 16 to relief . . . [and] a demand for the relief sought”); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 17 544, 555 (2007). Accordingly, the Court will adopt Judge Baldwin’s R&R in full. 18 19 Second, Judge Baldwin correctly found that Moreno’s Complaint is It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 3) is accepted and adopted in full. 20 It is further ordered that Moreno’s IFP Application (ECF No. 1) is granted. 21 The Clerk of Court is directed to file the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1). 22 The Clerk of Court is directed to send Moreno a copy of (1) this order and (2) the 23 § 1983 civil rights complaint packet (inmate). 24 It is further ordered that this case is dismissed without prejudice. 25 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. 26 DATED THIS 19th Day of September 2022. 27 28 MIRANDA M. DU CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?