Mascaro v. Forward Impressions ( 2019 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 JOHNNY LEE MASCARO, Case No.: 2:19-cv-00813-APG-CWH 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case 5 v. [ECF No. 2] 6 FORWARD IMPRESSIONS, et al., 7 Defendants 8 On July 12, 2019, Magistrate Judge Hoffman recommended that I dismiss plaintiff 9 Johnny Lee Mascaro’s complaint with leave to amend. ECF No. 2. Mascaro did not file an 10 objection. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and 11 recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo 12 determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is 13 made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the 14 district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if 15 objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 16 Additionally, Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation was returned in the mail. 17 ECF No. 4. Under Local Rule IA 3-1, a pro se party must immediately advise the court of any 18 change of address. “Failure to comply with this rule may result in the dismissal of the action, 19 entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the court.” LR IA 3-1. 20 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation (ECF 21 No. 2) is accepted. 22 / / / / 23 / / / / 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Johnny Lee Mascaro must update his address 2} and file an amended complaint on or before August 23, 2019. Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. 4 DATED this Ist day of August, 2019. Ge 6 ANDREW P. GORDON 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23