Rowe v. Nevada Office of Unemployment

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Michael Rowe, Case No. 2:23-cv-01189-RFB-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Report and Recommendation v. 8 State of Nevada; et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 On July 1, 2024, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and with 12 leave to amend and gave him until July 31, 2024, to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 19). 13 In doing so, the Court explained that “[f]ailure to timely comply with this order may result in the 14 recommended dismissal of this case.” (Id.). To date, Plaintiff has not filed anything further in 15 this action. 16 17 Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without 18 prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send this recommendation to Plaintiff. 19 20 NOTICE 21 Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2 any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be 22 in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within (14) days after service of this Notice. The 23 Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived 24 due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 25 (1985), reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986). The Ninth Circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable 26 issues waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order and/or appeal factual issues from the 27 1 order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi 2 Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 3 4 DATED: September 3, 2024 5

7 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27