Lietzke v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. ( 2019 )

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 6 BILL LIETZKE, Case No. 3:19-cv-00559-MMD-WGC 7 Plaintiff, ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 8 OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE GREYHOUND LINES, INC., WILLIAM G. COBB 9 Defendant. 10 11 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate 12 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 4) (“R&R) relating to Plaintiff’s application to proceed in 13 forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (“Complaint”) (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff 14 had until December 26, 2019, to file an objection but has not done so. The Court accepts 15 and adopts the R&R in full. 16 This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 17 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the 18 Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject 19 of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. 20 Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review 21 employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no 22 objections were made); Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) 23 (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district 24 courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an objection” and 25 accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no objection 26 was filed). The Court nonetheless engages in de novo review to determine whether to 27 accept the R&R and finds it should be accepted. 28 /// 1 Magistrate Judge Cobb recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff's application to 2 || proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss this action. The Court adopts this recommendation 3 || and will dismiss this case with prejudice. 4 As Judge Cobb points out in the R&R, Plaintiff has been declared a vexatious 5 || litigant and did not obtain leave from the Court’s Chief Judge to file this action. (ECF No. 6 || 4 at 2.) For this reason alone the application to proceed in forma pauperis should be 7 || denied and this action dismissed. The Court additionally agrees with the R&R that Nevada 8 || is not the proper venue for this action and that jurisdiction in this Court is apparently 9 || lacking. (/d.) 10 Itis therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation 11 || of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 4) is accepted and adopted in its entirety. 12 It is further ordered that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF 13 || No. 1) is denied. 14 It is further ordered that this action is dismissed with prejudice. 15 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. 16 DATED THIS 27" day of December 2019. 18 / —_ MIRANDA M. DU 19 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28