Ravin Crossbows, LLC v. Hunter's Manufacturing Company, Inc.

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 RAVIN CROSSBOWS, LLC, ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:21-cv-02213-GMN-EJY 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER HUNTER’S MANUFACTURING ) 7 COMPANY, INC. d/b/a TENPOINT ) CROSSBOW TECHNOLOGIES, ) 8 ) Defendant. ) 9 ) 10 11 Pending before the Court is the Order and Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF 12 No. 33), of United States Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah, which recommends that 13 Plaintiff Ravin Crossbows, LLC’s Motion for Clerk’s Entry of Default against Defendant 14 Hunter’s Manufacturing Company, Inc. d/b/a Tenpoint Crossbow Technologies, (ECF No. 23), 15 be denied as moot. 16 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 17 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 18 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 19 determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, 20 or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 21 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court 22 is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 23 objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Indeed, 24 the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate 25 judge’s R&R where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 1 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 2 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See R&R 1:25, 3 2:1–9, ECF No. 33) (informing that any objection must be made within fourteen (14) days of 4 May 18, 2022, making the deadline to object to the R&R June 1, 2022). 5 Accordingly, 6 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 33), is 7 ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Ravin Crossbows, LLC’s Motion for 9 Clerk’s Entry of Default against Defendant Hunter’s Manufacturing Company, Inc. d/b/a 10 Tenpoint Crossbow Technologies, (ECF No. 23), is DENIED as moot. 11 Dated this __3__ day of June, 2022. 12 13 14 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 15 United States District Court 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25