McKinney Jr. v. Valentin-Reyes

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA DON L. MCKINNEY, JR., Case No.: 2:22-cv-01644-APG-BNW 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case v. [ECF No. 12] ARGENIS VALENTIN-REYES, et al., 7 Defendants 8 On July 5, 2023, Magistrate Judge Weksler recommended that I dismiss this case without 9|| prejudice because the plaintiff has not filed the USM-285 forms to complete service as ordered. ECF No. 12. Plaintiff Don McKinney, Jr. did not object. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district 12}| courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed 13}| findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 14} Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and 15}|recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 16 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Weksler’s report and recommendation 17|| (ECF No. 12) is accepted, and plaintiff Don McKinney, Jr.’s third amended complaint (ECF No. is dismissed without prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 19 DATED this 27th day of July, 2023. 20 Z a ANDREWP.GORDON SS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE