Mkhitaryan v. County of Clark

Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * * 6 SERGEY MKHITARYAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-00708-RFB-NJK 7 Plaintiff, ORDER 8 v. 9 COUNTY OF CLARK, 10 Defendant. 11 12 Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 45) of 13 the Honorable Judge Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on June 27, 14 2025. A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 15 findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may 16 file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 17 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the 18 district court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 19 report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 20 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, 21 a district court is not required to conduct “any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report 22 and recommendations of a magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Pursuant 23 to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by July 11, 2025. No objections have been filed. 24 The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the Magistrate 25 Judge’s recommendation. 26 /// 27 /// 28 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 45) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 3 The Clerk of Court is instructed to close this matter accordingly. 4 5 6 DATED: July 23, 2025. tS 8 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-