No Tan Lines Republik v. Anderson

Opinion

NO TAN LINES REPUBIK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:24-cv-00870-GMN-NJK vs. ) ) ORDER ADOPTING R&R JIM ANDERSON, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R), (ECF No. 15), of United States Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe, which recommends the Court dismiss this case because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order to retain counsel. 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 to the R&R were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See Min. Order, ECF No. 15) (setting August 12, 2024, deadline for objections). The Court therefore ADOPTS the R&R in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 15), is ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk’s Office is kindly directed to close this case. Dated this _14 day of August, 2024. “hh, Gloria Navarro, District Judge cn ates District Court

Page 2 of 2