From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamilton v. Walsh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
May 20, 2016
Case No. 3:14-cv-00565-MMD-VPC (D. Nev. May. 20, 2016)

Opinion

Case No. 3:14-cv-00565-MMD-VPC

05-20-2016

ROLAND HAMILTON, Plaintiff, v. LISA WALSH, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING 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's ("R&R") (ECF No. 35) relating to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 28). Plaintiff had until May 8, 2016, to file an objection. 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 R&R 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).

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cooke's R&R. Upon reviewing the R&R and records in this case, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge's R&R in full.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the R&R of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 35) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

It is further ordered that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 28) is granted.

It is further ordered that the Clerk enter judgment and close this case.

DATED THIS 20th day of May 2016.

/s/_________

MIRANDA M. DU

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Hamilton v. Walsh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
May 20, 2016
Case No. 3:14-cv-00565-MMD-VPC (D. Nev. May. 20, 2016)
Case details for

Hamilton v. Walsh

Case Details

Full title:ROLAND HAMILTON, Plaintiff, v. LISA WALSH, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: May 20, 2016

Citations

Case No. 3:14-cv-00565-MMD-VPC (D. Nev. May. 20, 2016)