Opinion
Case No. 3:17-cv-00415-MMD-WGC
03-28-2018
PAUL LOUIS BELLUOMINI, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 5) ("R&R") relating to plaintiff's pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff had until March 27, 2018, to file an objection. (ECF No. 5.) To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed.
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). 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). 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 (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."). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge's recommendation, then the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge's recommendation to which no objection was filed).
The Magistrate Judge correctly observed that Plaintif has not filed a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis or paid the filing fee. (ECF No. 5 at 1-2.) Nevertheless, the Magistrate Judge screened the complaint and recommended dismissal with prejudice. Having reviewed the R&R and the filings in this case, the Court agrees and will adopt the R&R. (Id. at 3.)
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 5) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 4) is denied.
It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1).
It is further ordered that the complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is dismissed with prejudice.
It is further ordered that the Clerk enter judgment and close this case.
DATED THIS 28th day of March 2018.
/s/_________
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE