Willing v. Fed Judge (RFB) ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 NICHOLAS JAMES WILLING, ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:23-cv-00857-GMN-MDC 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER ADOPTING R&R FED JUDGE (RFB), et al., ) 7 ) Defendants. ) 8 ) 9 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R), (ECF No. 15), of 10 United States Magistrate Judge Maximiliano D. Couvillier, III, which recommends the Court 11 dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, (ECF No. 1-1), without leave to amend. Also pending before the 12 Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Renew Motion for Recusal of Judge, (ECF No. 13). 13 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 14 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 15 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 16 determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, 17 or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 18 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court 19 is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 20 objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Indeed, 21 the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate 22 judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United 23 States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 24 Here, no objections to the R&R were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See 25 Min. Order, ECF No. 15) (setting February 14, 2024, deadline for objections). The Court 1 therefore ADOPTS the R&R in full. 2 Accordingly, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 15), is 4 ADOPTED in full. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint, (ECF No. 1-1), is 6 DISMISSED with prejudice. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Renew Motion for Recusal of 8 Judge, (ECF No. 13), is DENIED as moot. 9 The Court kindly instructs the Clerk of Court to close this case. 10 Dated this _2_1__ day of February, 2024. 11 12 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 13 United States District Court 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25