Miller v. Aranas

Full title: CLIFFORD W. MILLER, Plaintiff, v. ROMEO ARANAS, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Aug 10, 2020

Case No. 3:17-cv-00068-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Aug. 10, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 3:17-cv-00068-MMD-WGC

08-10-2020

CLIFFORD W. MILLER, Plaintiff, v. ROMEO ARANAS, et al., Defendants.

MIRANDA M. DU CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB

Plaintiff Clifford W. Miller, an incarcerated person, brings this civil rights case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") concerning Miller's pending motions for preliminary injunction (ECF No. 38) and for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 51). (ECF No. 72.) Any objection to the R&R was due by August 7, 2020, but none has been filed. For the reasons below, the Court will accept the R&R in full.

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 fails to object 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); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) ("De novo review of the magistrate judges' findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.") (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation").

Here, Judge Cobb recommends that the noted motions be denied as moot and without prejudice given, among other things, Miller filing a third amended complaint ("TAC") (ECF No. 71)—now the operative complaint. (See ECF No. 72 at 4-5.) Because, as Judge Cobb notes, both pending motions are directed at the second amended complaint (id.) which has now been superseded by the TAC, the Court agrees they should be denied as moot without prejudice.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 72) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

It is further ordered that Miller's motion for preliminary injunction (ECF No. 38) and motion for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 51) are denied as moot without prejudice.

DATED THIS 10^th day of August 2020.

/s/_________

MIRANDA M. DU

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE