Brathwaite v. Southwest Medical Associates, Inc. ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * 7 MARGUERITE BRATHWAITE, M.D., Case No. 2:22-CV-729 JCM (NJK) 8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 v. 10 SOUTHWEST MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC., 11 Defendant(s). 12 13 Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Koppe’s sealed report and 14 recommendation (“R&R”).1 (ECF No. 90). After considering the parties’ respective arguments 15 and holding an evidentiary hearing on the matter (ECF No. 77), she recommends that defendant 16 Southwest Medical Associates, Inc.’s motion to enforce settlement (ECF No. 44 & 48 (sealed)) 17 be granted. (Id. at 1). 18 No objections were filed to the R&R. Thus, the district court is not obligated to conduct 19 a de novo review of the R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring courts to “make a de novo 20 determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is 21 made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“[T]he 22 district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if 23 objection is made, but not otherwise.”). 24 Accordingly, 25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Judge Koppe’s R&R 26 (ECF Nos. 90, 91) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED, in full. 27 28 1 The redacted version is filed on the docket at ECF No. 91. 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s motion to enforce settlement (ECF 2 Nos. 44, 48) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties file the appropriate dismissal documents by 4 March 22, 2024. 5 DATED February 23, 2024. 6 ________________________________________ 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28