Godwin v. Senior Garden Apartments

Opinion

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * * 6 VICTORIA-JOY GODWIN, Case No. 2:17-cv-02178-MMD-DJA 7 Plaintiff, ORDER

8 v. 9 SENIOR GARDEN APARTMENTS, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Pro se Plaintiff Victoria-Joy Godwin filed a fourth amended complaint against 13 numerous defendants, including Clark County. (ECF No. 87 at 15.) Before the Court is 14 the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) of United States 15 Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts (ECF No. 180), recommending that Defendant Clark 16 County’s request for dismissal in their motion for an order quashing service (ECF No. 17 135) be granted, and that Clark County be dismissed from this action. Plaintiff had until 18 January 19, 2021 to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed. 19 For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R, and dismiss Clark 20 County from the entirety of this case. 21 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 22 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 23 fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to 24 conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas 25 v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 26 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and 27 recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the 1 || Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 2 || clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 3 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is 4 || satisfied Judge Albregts did not clearly err. Here, Judge Albregts recommends that Clark 5 || County be dismissed from this action as Plaintiff's fourth amended complaint fails to state 6 || aclaim against Clark County upon which relief can be granted. (ECF No. 180 at 2.) The 7 || Court agrees with Judge Albregts. Having reviewed the R&R and the record in this case, 8 || the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 9 It is therefore ordered that Judge Albregts’s Report and Recommendation (ECF 10 || No. 180) is accepted and adopted in full. 11 It is further ordered that Defendant Clark County is dismissed from the entirety of 12 || this case. 13 DATED THIS 21* Day of January 2021. 14 15 {LQ 16 aR SO 17 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28