Basile v. The Los Angeles Film School, LLC

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 CONSTANTINO BASILE, Case No.: 2:24-cv-00108-APG-MDC

4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation 5 v. [ECF Nos. 95, 105] 6 THE LOS ANGELES FILM SCHOOL, LLC, et al., 7 Defendants 8

9 On November 6, 2024, Magistrate Judge Couvillier recommended that I deny as moot 10 plaintiff Constantino Basile’s motion to vacate my order that granted defendant Santa Monica 11 Police Department’s motion to dismiss and to allow Basile to amend the complaint. ECF Nos. 12 95; 105. Judge Couvillier noted that the motion was moot because Basile filed an amended 13 complaint. ECF No. 105. Basile did not object to Judge Couvillier’s recommendation. Thus, I 14 am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. 15 § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 16 report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna- 17 Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the 18 magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 19 otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 20 / / / / 21 / / / / 22 / / / / 23 / / / / ] I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Couvillier’s report and recommendation 2|| (ECF No. 105) is accepted, and plaintiff Constantino Basile’s motion (ECF No. 95) is DENIED as moot. 4 DATED this 2nd day of December, 2024.

6 ANDREW P. GORDON 7 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23