From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Espinoza

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 3, 2020
Case No.: 2:19-cv-00682-GMN-BNW (D. Nev. Jan. 3, 2020)

Opinion

Case No.: 2:19-cv-00682-GMN-BNW

01-03-2020

RANDELL JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. JORGE ESPINOZA, Defendant.


ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler, (ECF No. 6), which recommends that Plaintiff Randell Jackson's ("Plaintiff's") case be dismissed without prejudice.

Plaintiff has failed to update his address with the Court pursuant to Local Rule IA 3-1, which provides that failure to comply may result in ". . . the dismissal of the action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the court." D. Nev. Local R. IA 3-1.

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The 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); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). 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, e.g., United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so, December 16, 2019, has passed. (Min. Order, ECF No. 6).

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 6), is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED in full.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, (ECF No. 1) is DENIED as moot.

The Clerk of Court shall close this case and enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 3 day of January, 2020.

/s/_________

Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Jackson v. Espinoza

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jan 3, 2020
Case No.: 2:19-cv-00682-GMN-BNW (D. Nev. Jan. 3, 2020)
Case details for

Jackson v. Espinoza

Case Details

Full title:RANDELL JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. JORGE ESPINOZA, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jan 3, 2020

Citations

Case No.: 2:19-cv-00682-GMN-BNW (D. Nev. Jan. 3, 2020)