Opinion
Case No. 3:17-cv-00469-MMD-VPC
03-29-2018
DONALD M. SAVAGE, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEVADA, et. al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING 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 (ECF No. 5) ("R&R") relating to plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP Application") (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff has until March 16, 2018, to file an objection. (ECF No. 5.) 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 recommendation 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).
Plaintiff fails to object to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court will adopt the R&R.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 5) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.
It is ordered that plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) without having to prepay the full filing fee is granted.
It is further ordered that the Clerk detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 1-1).
It is further ordered that the claims against Defendant the State of Nevada are dismissed with prejudice.
It is further ordered that the claims for damages asserted against Defendant Governor Sandoval in his official capacity is dismissed with prejudice.
It is further ordered that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend as to Counts I, II, III and IV against all Defendants.
It is further ordered that the Clerk enter judgment and close this case.
DATED THIS 29th day of March 2018.
/s/_________
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE