Neenan v. Sisolak

Opinion

DAVID NEENAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:21-cv-00368-GMN-BNW vs. ) ) ORDER ADOPTING R&R STEVE SISOLAK, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 60), of United States Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler, which recommends the case be dismissed without prejudice and closed. A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See Min. Order, ECF No. 60) (setting a November 8, 2023, deadline for objections). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 60), is ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are DENIED as moot. The Court instructs the Clerk of Court to close the case. Dated this _1_5__ day of November, 2023. ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge United States District Court