Wright v. McPeak

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided April 14, 2025·No. 2:22-cv-01406·Unknown

Opinion

* * *

BRIAN KEITH WRIGHT, Case No. 2:22-cv-01406-RFB-EJY

Plaintiffs, ORDER

v.

CHRISTOPHER, et al.,

Defendants.

Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Honorable Elayna J. Youchah, United States Magistrate Judge, dated September 17, 2024 (ECF No. 22). For the reasons explained below, the Court adopts the R&R in full A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct “any review,” de novo1 or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). No objection was filed here. Further, on independent review, the Court agrees with Judge

1 De novo review simply means a review by one court using the lower court’s record but reviewing the evidence and the law without deference to the lower court’s findings and rulings. See Appeal, Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019). 1 Youchah’s reasoning that Plaintiff has improperly produced filings in a closed case. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 22) is ADOPTED in full. Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 20) and the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 21) are DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is instructed to close the case and accept no further filings in this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court will provide Plaintiff Brian Keith Wright with a physical copy of this Order by U.S postage. 1] DATED: April 14, 2025. RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wright v. McPeak, (D. Nev. 2025).

Wright v. McPeak (Wright v. McPeak) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)