Martin v. Saul

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: January 5, 2021
• Docket: 2:20-cv-02041
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Case No.: 2:20-cv-02041-JAD-DJA 4 Shajuando Martin, 5 we Plaintiff Order Adopting Report & Recommendatio 6 and Dismissing Action v. 7 Commissioner of Social Security, 8 [ECF No. 5] 9 Defendant 10 1] On November 9, 2020, the magistrate judge dismissed the plaintiff's complaint with 12 || leave to amend, warning the plaintiff that the failure to file an amended complaint by December 13 2020, would result in a recommendation for this court to dismiss this action.! When the 14 || plaintiff filed nothing by that deadline, the magistrate judge entered a report and 15 || recommendation that this case be dismissed.” The deadline for the plaintiff to object to that 16 || recommendation was December 28, 2020, and the plaintiff neither filed objections nor moved to 17 || extend the deadline to do so. “[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and 18 || recommendation unless objections are filed.”? Having reviewed the R&R, I find good cause to 19 || adopt it, and I do. 20 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 21 ||Recommendation [ECF No. 5] is ADOPTED in its entirety. This action is DISMISSED, and 22 || the Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE THIS CASE. SME 23 Ak = U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey 9A Dated: January 5, 2021 25 1 26 || ECF No. 3. 97 ||? ECF No. 5. 3 Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also Thomas v. Arn, 47 140, 150 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).