Griffith v. Paran LLP

Opinion

3 MICHAEL GRIFFITH, et al., ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:21-cv-01397-GMN-BNW 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER PARAN LLP, ) 7 ) Defendant. ) 8 ) 9 10 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States 11 Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler, (ECF No. 6), which recommends that the case with respect 12 to Michael Griffith be dismissed without prejudice. 13 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 14 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 15 D. Nev. Local R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 16 determination of those portions to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. 17 Local R. IB 3-2(b). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 18 or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). 19 Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . 20 . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 21 Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a 22 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., 23 United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 24 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so, September 22, 2021, has 25 passed. (See Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 6). 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 6), is 3 ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 4 The case with respect to Plaintiff Michael Griffith is dismissed without prejudice. 5 DATED this __3_0___ day of September, 2021. 6 7 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 8 United States District Court 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25