Yoe v. Las Vegas Metro Police Department Vice Unit

Opinion

JOSHUA RUELL YOE, Plaintiff, Case No.: 2:24-cv-02425-GMN-EJY vs. ORDER ADOPTING, IN PART, LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Defendant. Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF No. 14), from United States Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah recommending that Plaintiff Joshua Yoe’s case be dismissed without prejudice, without leave to amend, and for judgment to be entered in favor of Defendant. (See generally R&R, ECF No. 14). 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 if the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations concern matters that may not be finally determined by a magistrate judge. D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). 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 R&R where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). ] No objections to the R&R were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See R&R, ECF No. 14) (setting a June 30, 2025, deadline for objections). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 14), is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, IN PART. The Court dismisses this action without prejudice but will not enter judgment in favor of Defendant because the action is dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly instructed to close the case. Dated this 15 _ day of August, 2025. 1] Yj, Wh | Gloria M. Nalvarro, District Judge United ie District Court

Page 2 of 2