Motley v. J. Manzanedo 17753

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3) COURTNEY MOTLEY, Case No.: 2:24-cv-00735-APG-DJA 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation v. [ECF No. 3] J. MANZANEDO, et al., 7 Defendants 8 On May 28, 2024, Magistrate Judge Albregts recommended that I dismiss with prejudice 9|| plaintiff Courtney Motley’s perjury claims against Officers Silva and Manzanedo and Nurse 10||Dermanetian. Motley did not object. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of 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 to which 13} objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en 141 banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 16 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Albregts’ report and recommendation 17|| (ECF No. 3) is accepted and plaintiff Courtney Motley’s perjury claims against defendants J. Manzanedo, Carlos Silva, and Jeri Dermanetian are dismissed with prejudice. Motley’s remaining claims will proceed as set forth in Judge Albregts’ report and recommendation. ECF No. 3 at 7. 21 DATED this 13th day of June, 2024. 22 (INR ANDREWP.GORDON. SS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE