Opinion
Case No. 3:17-cv-00075-MMD-VPC
04-28-2017
BILL LIETZKE Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE VALERIE P. COOKE
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 4) ("R&R") relating to Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff had until April 21, 2017 to file an objection ("Objection"). (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff filed his objection on April 28, 2017. (ECF No. 5.) While Plaintiff's Objection was untimely, the Court has considered his objection.
This 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). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, then the court is required to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In light of Plaintiff's objection, the Court engages in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cook's Recommendation.
The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Magistrate Judge further recommends that this case be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction because plaintiff and defendants are alleged to be residents of Alabama and there are no allegations of contacts with Nevada. In his Objection, Plaintiff cites to general case law governing personal jurisdiction, but it is clear that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over named out of state defendants. Upon reviewing the Recommendation and Plaintiff's filings, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation in full.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 4) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No 1) is granted.
It is further ordered that the Clerk file the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1).
It is further ordered that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk is instructed to close this case.
DATED THIS 28th day of April 2017.
/s/_________
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE