Sanchez v. Rigney

Opinion

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 JASMINE PAUL SANCHEZ, Case No. 3:22-cv-00109-ART-CLB 6 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 7 v. RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 35) AND GRANTING MOTION FOR 8 CHET RIGNEY, SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 23)

9 Defendant. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Jasmine Paul Sanchez, an inmate at Ely State Prison, 12 brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Chet Rigney 13 alleging sexual harassment and excessive force. Before the Court is the Report 14 and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin 15 (ECF No. 35), recommending the Court grant Defendant’s motion for summary 16 judgment. Mr. Sanchez originally had until September 20, 2023 to file an 17 objection to Judge Baldwin’s R&R and was given an extension to March 15, 18 2024. (See ECF Nos. 35 at 12; 40.) As of today, no objection has been filed. For 19 this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R and grants 20 Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. 21 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 22 or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where 23 a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not 24 required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of 25 an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. 26 Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the 27 magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one 28 or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis 1 || in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that 2 || the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the 3 || record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 4 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review 5 || and is satisfied Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. Judge Baldwin recommends 6 || summary judgment in favor of Defendant because there is no genuine issue of 7 || material fact as to whether Mr. Sanchez was subject to sexual harassment or 8 || excessive force. Mr. Sanchez has provided the Court with no evidence to support 9 || his claims, has not contested Defendant’s motion, and has not objected to Judge 10 || Baldwin’s R&R. Further, the evidence provided by Defendant demonstrates that 11 || the instances of which Mr. Sanchez complains do not constitute sexual 12 || harassment or excessive force, as a matter of law. 13 Having reviewed the R&R and the record in this case, the Court is satisfied 14 || that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err and adopts the R&R in full. 15 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation 16 || (ECF No. 35) is accepted and adopted in full. 17 It is further ordered that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 18 || No. 23) is granted. 19 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this 20 || case. 21 22 Dated this 26tt day of March 2024. 23 24 Ans . jlosead Jen 25 ANNE R. TRAUM 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28