Muric-Dorado v. LVMPD

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 RAMON MURIC-DORADO, Case No. 2:18-cv-01184-JCM-EJY

4 Plaintiff ORDER

5 v.

6 LVMPD et al.,

7 Defendants

8 9 10 Presently before the court is the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (“R&R”). 11 (ECF No. 62). 12 Judge Youchah recommends dismissing defendant “Karla” without prejudice. (Id.). 13 Plaintiffs failed to identify defendant with a last name and “no further information has been 14 provided . . . despite substantial time and opportunity to do so.” (ECF Nos. 31 & 59). 15 This court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 16 recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party timely objects 17 to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de novo 18 determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made.” 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 20 Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at 21 all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 22 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a 23 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United 24 States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review 25 employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no 26 objections were made). 27 Nevertheless, this court conducted a de novo review to determine whether to adopt the 28 recommendation of the magistrate judge. Upon reviewing the recommendation and attendant 1 | circumstances, this court finds good cause appears to adopt the magistrate judge’s findings in full. 2 Accordingly, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Judge Youchah’s R&R 4 (ECF No. 62) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Karla is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. 6 DATED July 13, 2020. ©. Atala 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-