Sears v. Sisolak

District Court, D. Nevada

Sears v. Sisolak

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA BRETT SEARS, Case No.: 2:20-cv-00890-APG-BNW 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case v. [ECF No. 7] STEPHEN SISOLAK, 7 Defendant 8 On July 21, 2020, Magistrate Judge Weksler recommended that this case be dismissed 9}| without prejudice because plaintiff Brett Sears did not pay the filing fee as ordered. ECF Nos. 6, Sears did not file an objection and he did not pay the filing fee. Thus, I am not obligated to 11|}conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1) (requiring 12}| district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified 13} proposed findings to which objection is made’); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 16 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Weksler’s report and recommendation 17|| (EF No. 7) is accepted and plaintiff Brett Sears’ complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 19 DATED this 13th day of August, 2020. 20 Z. ANDREWP.GORDON. SS 09 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

23

Reference

Status
Unknown