From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chatman v. Las Vegas Metro Police Dept

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jun 14, 2017
Case No. 2:16-CV-14 JCM (NJK) (D. Nev. Jun. 14, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 2:16-CV-14 JCM (NJK)

06-14-2017

LEONARD L. CHATMAN, Plaintiff(s), v. LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE DEPT., et al., Defendant(s).


ORDER

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Koppe's report and recommendation that plaintiff Leonard Chatman's complaint against the Las Vegas Metro Police Department be denied. (ECF No. 6). No objections have been filed to the report and recommendation.

This 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). If a party fails to object to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, 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).

Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit's decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review "any issue that is not the subject of an objection.").

Here, the magistrate judge analyzed whether it is proper to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint. (ECF No. 6).

First, the court has not received an amended complaint or any request to extend the deadline for filing one. (Id.). The magistrate judge dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. (ECF No. 2).

Second, the case is subject to dismissal because the plaintiff failed to update his address with the court. (ECF Nos. 4, 5, 6); see also Local Special Rule 2-2.

In sum, Magistrate Judge Koppe concluded that the case be dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 6). As mentioned, no timely objections have been filed in response to this report and recommendation. Therefore, this court will adopt Magistrate Judge Koppe's report and recommendation. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Koppe (ECF No. 6) be, and the same hereby are, ADOPTED in their entirety.

The clerk shall close the case and enter judgment accordingly.

DATED June 14, 2017.

/s/ James C. Mahan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Chatman v. Las Vegas Metro Police Dept

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jun 14, 2017
Case No. 2:16-CV-14 JCM (NJK) (D. Nev. Jun. 14, 2017)
Case details for

Chatman v. Las Vegas Metro Police Dept

Case Details

Full title:LEONARD L. CHATMAN, Plaintiff(s), v. LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE DEPT., et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jun 14, 2017

Citations

Case No. 2:16-CV-14 JCM (NJK) (D. Nev. Jun. 14, 2017)