Motley v. Silva

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * *

7 COURTNEY S. MOTLEY, Case No. 2:23-cv-00624-RFB-BNW

8 Plaintiff, ORDER

9 v.

10 CARLOS SILVA, et al., 11 Defendants. 12

13 14 Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 53) of the 15 Honorable Brenda Weksler, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on December 17, 2024. A 16 district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations 17 made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific written objections to the 18 findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). 19 When written objections have been filed, the district court is required to “make a de novo 20 determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations 21 to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party 22 fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct “any review,” de novo or 23 otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 24 149 (1985). Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by December 31, 2024. No 25 objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the 26 Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. 27 /// 28 /// ] IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 53) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Yasmeen Rubin and Jerri Dermanetian are DISMISSED from this action without prejudice. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Deceit claim against Defendant VanDyke is 6 | DISMISSED as duplicative. 7 8 DATED: May 20, 2025. 9 10 Kc RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-