Nicole Beverly Silverberg v. Sanford Howard Barsky

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: December 24, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02148
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Nicole Beverly Silverberg, Case No. 2:25-cv-02148-CDS-NJK

5 Plaintiff Order Adopting the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and 6 v. Dismissing the Case

7 Sanford Howard Barsky,

8 Defendant [ECF No. 3] 9 10 Nicole Silverberg initiated this action by filing a complaint for damages and injunctive 11 relief, and application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1, 1-2. So United States Magistrate 12 Judge Nancy J. Koppe screened the complaint and issued a report and recommendation (R&R) 13 that I dismiss this case because it “is identical to Plaintiff’s complaint that was already screened 14 and filed on the docket in another pending case.” R&R, ECF No. 3 (citing ECF No. 1-1 in 15 Silverberg v. Barsky, Case No. 2:25-cv-02197-GMN-EJY). Judge Koppe reasons that “the latter case 16 is more advanced given that the screening order has already issued and the complaint has been 17 filed on the docket.” ECF No. 3 at n.1. Silverberg had until December 19, 2025, to file any specific 18 written objections to the R&R. Id. at 2 (citing Local Rule IB 3-2(a) (stating that parties wishing 19 to object to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations must file specific written 20 objections within fourteen days)); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (same). 21 Here, no objection is filed and the time to do so has passed. The law is clear that “no 22 review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are 23 filed.” Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 24 140, 150 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to 25 review a magistrate judge’s R&R where no objections are filed. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 26 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). I therefore accept and adopt the R&R in its entirety. 1 Conclusion 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [ECF No. 3] is accepted in full. Silverberg’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. 4 Because this case is dismissed as duplicative, the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to 5}| close this case. J, ) 6 Dated: December 24, 2025 LZ ‘

7 [ f 8 oy ei D. Silva . d States District Judge 9 / 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26