Miller v. Bridgecrest

Opinion

DUHJUAN L. MILLER, Case No.: 2:23-cv-00585-APG-DJA 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case v. [ECF No. 16] BRIDGECREST and DANIEL GAUDREAU, 7 Defendants 8 9 On February 26, 2024, Magistrate Judge Albregts recommended that I dismiss this case 10} without prejudice because plaintiff Duhjuan Miller did not file an amended complaint by the given deadline. ECF No. 16. Miller did not object. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 17 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Albregts’ report and recommendation (ECF No. 16) is accepted and this case is dismissed without prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 20 DATED this 14th day of March, 2024. Ze-— 22 ANDREW P. GORDON 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE