Sauceda v. City of North Las Vegas
Sauceda v. City of North Las Vegas
Trial Court Opinion
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3 ESTATE OF FERNANDO SAUCEDA, et al., ) 4 ) Plaintiffs, ) Case No.: 2:11-cv-02116-GMN-NJK 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, et al., ) 7 ) Defendants. ) 8 9 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States 10 Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe, (ECF No. 181), which recommends that the Renewed 11 Petition for Compromise of Minors’ Claims, (ECF No. 174), be granted and funds be ordered 12 “deposited into a blocked trust account with proof of such deposit provided to the Court within 13 60 days of the order resolving the motion.” The parties had until April 29, 2020, to file any 14 objection to the R&R. (Min. Order, ECF No. 181). 15 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 16 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 17 D. Nev. Local R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 18 determination of those portions to which objections are made.
Id.The Court may accept, reject, 19 or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 20
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. Local R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the 21 Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 22 objection.” Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 149(1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized 23 that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 24 where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia,
328 F.3d 1114, 25 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 1 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 181), is 3 ADOPTED in full. The Renewed Petition for Compromise of Minors’ Claims, (ECF No. 174), 4 is GRANTED. The funds addressed in the R&R shall be deposited into a blocked trust 5 account with proof of such deposit provided to the Court within 60 days of this Order. 6 DATED this _3_0__ day of April, 2020. 7 8 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 9 United States District Court 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Reference
- Status
- Unknown