1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 BILL LIETZKE, ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:20-cv-00922-GMN-DJA 5 vs. ) 6 ) ORDER CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al., ) 7 ) Defendants. ) 8 ) ) 9 10 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States 11 Magistrate Judge Daniel Albregts, (ECF No. 3), which recommends that the case be dismissed 12 without prejudice. 13 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 14 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4.

(b)(1)(B); 15 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 16 determination of those portions to which objections are made.

The Court may accept, reject, 17 or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 18

(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is 19 not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an 20 objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized 21 that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 22 where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia,

, 23 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). 24 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so, June 5, 2020, has passed. (Min. 25 Order, ECF No. 3). 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 3), is 3 ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED in full. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED without prejudice. 5 DATED this __9___ day of June, 2020. 6 7 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 8 United States District Court 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25