Mays v. Powder Coating Plus, Inc. ( 2024 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Jametria Mays, Case No. 2:24-cv-00234-JAD-MDC 5 6 Plaintiff Order Adopting Report and vs. Recommendation for Dismissal of Certain 7 Claims Powder Coating Plus, Inc, et al., 8 Defendants 9 On 5/16/24 the magistrate judge entered this report and recommendation [ECF No. 7]: 10 The Court previously granted pro se plaintiff Jametria Mays’s application to proceed in forma 11 pauperis. ECF No. 5. The Court ordered that plaintiff’s claims for sexual harassment, hostile work 12 environment, FMLA claim, and racial discrimination were dismissed without prejudice with leave to 13 amend. Id. The Court ordered that if plaintiff did not file an amended complaint, she would proceed on 14 her single claim of retaliation only. Id. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint and her time to do 15 so has passed. 16 For the reasons discussed in the Court’s earlier screening order (ECF No. 5), plaintiff’s claims 17 for sexual harassment, hostile work environment, FMLA claim, and racial discrimination should be 18 dismissed. Plaintiff will not be prejudiced because she has an opportunity to object to this report and 19 recommendation. Plaintiff shall proceed on her single claim of retaliation only. 20 ACCORDINGLY, 21 The Court RECOMMENDS that plaintiff’s claims for sexual harassment, hostile work 22 environment, FMLA claim, and racial discrimination should be DISMISSED. 23 The Court ORDERS that plaintiff shall proceed with her single claim of retaliation only. 24 The Court FURTHER ORDERS that the Clerk of Court shall issue summons to Powder Coating 25 Plus, Inc. 1 The Court FURTHER ORDERS that plaintiff Jametria Mays shall serve copies of her Complaint 2 || and summons upon Powder Coating Plus, Inc. by no later than August 25, 2024. 3 The Court FURTHER ORDERS that plaintiff Jametria Mays shall familiarize herself with the 4 || Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules regarding service of process and next steps to prosecute 5 || this case. ‘ ORDER ' The deadline for any party to object to this recommendation was May 30, 2024, and no party 8 filed anything or asked to extend the deadline to do so. “[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s 9 report and recommendation unless objections are filed.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 10 (9th Cir. 2003). Having reviewed the report and recommendation, I find good cause to adopt it, 11 |! andI do. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation 12 || [ECF No. 7] is ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiff's claims for sexual harassment, hostile work 13 || environment, violation of the FMLA, and racial discrimination are DISMISSED, so this case 14 || proceeds on the retaliation claim only. 15 The plaintiff must serve her complaint and summons, along with a copy of this order, on 16 || Powder Coating Plus, Inc. by August 25, 2024. ants US. DistrictJudge Jennifer Dorsey 18 June 5, 2024 19 20 21 22 23 24 25