Danam v. Elaine Kelley

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA Rafael Danam, Case No. 2:19-cv-01606-JAD-DJA 4 Plaintiff v. Order Adopting Report and 5 Recommendation Elaine Kelley, et al., 6 [ECF Nos. 8, 11, 18, 22] Defendants 8 Rafael Danam sues Elaine Kelley, the principal of his former employer, the Somerset Academy Aliante Charter School, asserting constitutional and employment-related claims.

10 Because Danam was granted in forma pauperis status, the court screened his complaint; upon doing so, it dismissed that complaint with a detailed explanation of its deficiencies and gave Danam leave to amend.1 Danam filed an amended complaint,2 but it, too, fails to state a colorable claim for relief. So Magistrate Judge Albregts dismissed that amended complaint without prejudice and with additional detail about how to cure the deficiencies. He also recommends that I deny plaintiff’s pending motions for summary judgment and injunctive relief,3 along with the defendant’s motion to dismiss.4 The deadline for objections to that recommendation passed without objection or any request to extend the deadline to file one.

1 ECF No. 5.

2 ECF No. 7.

23 3 ECF Nos. 8, 11.

4 ECF No. 18.

1} “[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed.”> 3 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [ECF No. 22] is ADOPTED in full; 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the following motions [ECF Nos. 8, 11, 18] are DENIED as moot because there is yet no operative complaint: 7 e §=Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Failure of Defendant to Pay Last Day 8 of Wages from Wrongful Termination/Breach of Contract [ECF No. 8]; 9 e Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Order to Notify all parents of Subpoena for Cour 10 Trial for Plaintiffs Wrongful Termination/Breach of Contract by Defendant [ECF 1] No. 11]; and 12 e Defendant Elaine Kelley’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint [ECF No. 18].

13 Dated: January 3, 2020 14 LZ 5 een eK, Dorsey 5 Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).