Opinion
2:21-cv-00531-APG-NJK
01-06-2022
JAMES E. COHAN, Plaintiff v. JOHN SMITH and LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT,
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
[ECF NO. 9]
ANDREW P. GORDON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On December 7, 2021, Magistrate Judge Koppe recommended that I dismiss plaintiff James Cohan's case because he did not pay the filing fee or file an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis by the court-ordered deadline. ECF No. 9. Cohan did not object. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)).
I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Koppe's report and recommendation (ECF No. 9) is accepted. Plaintiff James Cohan's complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is dismissed without prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 1