From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Provino v. Abbott

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jun 1, 2018
Case No. 3:18-cv-00203-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Jun. 1, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 3:18-cv-00203-MMD-WGC

06-01-2018

HELEN PROVINO, Plaintiff, v. GREG ABBOTT, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) ("R&R") relating to Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (ECF No. 1) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1-1). Plaintiff had until May 23, 2018, to object to the R&R. To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed.

This Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, then the court is required to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit's decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review "any issue that is not the subject of an objection."). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge's recommendation, then the court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge's recommendation to which no objection was filed).

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt Magistrate Judge Cobb's R&R. The Magistrate Judge recommended denying the IFP and dismissing the action with prejudice. Upon reviewing the R&R and the complaint, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge's R&R in full.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 3) is accepted and adopted in its entirety. It is ordered that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) is denied. This action is dismissed with prejudice.

The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment in accordance with this order and close this case.

DATED THIS 1st day of June 2018.

/s/_________

MIRANDA M. DU

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Provino v. Abbott

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Jun 1, 2018
Case No. 3:18-cv-00203-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Jun. 1, 2018)
Case details for

Provino v. Abbott

Case Details

Full title:HELEN PROVINO, Plaintiff, v. GREG ABBOTT, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jun 1, 2018

Citations

Case No. 3:18-cv-00203-MMD-WGC (D. Nev. Jun. 1, 2018)

Citing Cases

Provino v. Wray

jurisdiction.Provino v. Abbott, No. 3:18-cv-00203-MMD-WGC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93093 (D. Nev.…