Opinion
3:21-cv-00311-MMD-CLB
08-22-2023
JASMINE PAUL SANCHEZ, Plaintiff, v. MITCHELL SHARP, Defendant.
ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Pro se Plaintiff Jasmine Paul Sanchez submitted a complaint for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 8.) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla L. Baldwin, recommending that the Court grant Defendant Mitchell Sharp's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 46 (“Motion”)). (ECF No. 63.) Objections to the R&R were due August 15, 2023. (See id.) To date, Sanchez has not objected to the R&R. Because the Court agrees with Judge Baldwin's analysis in the R&R, and as further explained below, the Court adopts the R&R in full and will grant the Motion.
Because there was no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is satisfied that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1116 (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). In the R&R, Judge Baldwin recommends the Court grant the Motion because Sharp met his initial summary judgment burden as to each of Sanchez' claims, nothing in the record indicates genuine disputes of material fact pertinent to the Motion, and Sanchez never responded to the Motion despite being warned about its potentially dispositive impact, and being given two sua sponte extensions of time to respond-deadlines that Sanchez did not meet. (ECF No. 63.) Judge Baldwin did not clearly err in the R&R.
It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 63) is accepted and adopted in full.
It is further ordered that Sharp's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 46) is granted.
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly-in Sharp's favor- and close this case.