Matthews v. Reubart ( 2021 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * * 6 IVAN LEE MATTHEWS, II, Case No. 3:19-cv-00221-MMD-CLB 7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 WILLIAM REUBART, et al., 9 Defendant. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Ivan Lee Matthews, II brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 12 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) of 13 United States Magistrate Judge Carla L. Baldwin (ECF No. 24), recommending the Court 14 grant Defendant William Reubart’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12 15 (“Motion”)), enter judgment in Defendant’s favor, and close this case. Plaintiff had until 16 October 13, 2021, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed. 17 For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R, and will grant 18 Defendant’s Motion. 19 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 20 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party 21 fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to 22 conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas 23 v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 24 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and 25 recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the 26 findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory 27 Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 1 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is 2 || satisfied Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. Here, Judge Baldwin recommends that the 3 || Court grant the Motion because the evidence presented with the Motion shows Defendant 4 || did not personally participate in the alleged constitutional violations (ECF No. 24 at 7-9), 5 || even considering that Defendant is the pertinent prison’s grievance coordinator □□□□ at 10- 6 || 11), or, alternatively, because there is no evidence Defendant knew of Plaintiff's 7 || “condition or that he deliberately ignored his condition placing him at risk of harm” (id. at 8 || 11-13). The Court agrees with Judge Baldwin. Having reviewed the R&R and the record 9 || in this case, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 10 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF 11 || No. 24) is accepted and adopted in full. 12 It is further ordered that Defendant Reubart’s motion for summary judgment (ECF 13 || No. 12) is granted. 14 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly, in Defendant 15 || Reubart’s favor, and close this case. 16 DATED THIS 20" Day of October 2021. 17 19 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 50 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28