GATES v. WELLS

Case No. 3:13-cv-00228-MMD-VPC.

RUSSELL GATES, Plaintiff, v. JEFF WELLS, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Nevada.

July 27, 2016.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Remeo S. Aranas, Defendant, represented by Frederick J. Perdomo , Nevada Attorney General & Peter Kevin Keegan , Nevada Attorney General's Office.

Robert Bannister, Defendant, represented by Frederick J. Perdomo , Nevada Attorney General & Peter Kevin Keegan , Nevada Attorney General's Office.

Karen Gedney, Defendant, represented by Frederick J. Perdomo , Nevada Attorney General & Peter Kevin Keegan , Nevada Attorney General's Office.

Maricela Gates, Interested Party, Pro Se.


ORDER ADOPTING AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE VALERIE P. COOK

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 32) ("R&R"), recommending that the Court grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 30). Plaintiff had until July 2, 2016 to object. (ECF No. 32.) To date, no objection to the R&R has 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).

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cooke's R&R. The R&R recommends that this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to timely substitute parties under Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(a)(1) and want of prosecution pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Upon reviewing the R&R and filings in this case, this Court finds good cause to accept and adopt the Magistrate Judge's R&R in full.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 32) is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

It is further ordered that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 30) is granted and this action is dismissed with prejudice.

The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this case.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases