2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 HEATH VINCENT FULKERSON, Case No. 3:20-cv-00206-MMD-WGC

7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 CITY OF RENO, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 Plaintiff has filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to

and 12 an application to proceed in forma pauperis (the “IFP Application”). (ECF Nos. 1, 1-1.) 13 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate 14 Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 4), recommending that the Court dismiss this action with 15 prejudice. To date, no objection has been filed. For that reason, and because the Court 16 agrees with Judge Cobb, the Court will adopt the R&R. 17 The Court incorporates the facts outlined in the R&R (ECF No. 4 at 3-4) and does 18 not recite them here. 19 This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 20 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Where a party 21 fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any 22 issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); 23 see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of 24 the magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both 25 parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory 26 Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 27 clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation”). 28 1 While Plaintiff has not objected, the Court nevertheless conducts de novo review to 2 || determine whether to adopt Judge Cobb’s R&R. Judge Cobb recommends that the Court 3 || grant the IFP Application because he cannot pay the filing fee. (ECF No. 4 at 2.) 4 || Furthermore, because the Complaint vaguely states that there has been fraud and 5 || violations—without any factual allegations—Judge Cobb recommends that the Court 6 || dismiss this action. (/d. at 4.) In fact, Plaintiff has filed numerous complaints in this district 7 || and has been advised multiple times to refrain from filing duplicative lawsuits, vague 8 || generalizations of constitutional violations. (/d. at 5 (citing to Case Nos. 3:19-cv-00729- 9 || MMD-CLB, 3:19-cv-00714-MMD-WGC, 3:19-cv-00721-MMD-WGC, and 3:19-cv-00753- 10 || MMD-WGC).) Accordingly, Judge Cobb recommends dismissing this action with prejudice 11 || because it is unlikely that Plaintiff can state a claim plausible claim for relief. (/d.) The Court 12 || agrees with Judge Cobb. 13 It is therefore ordered that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge 14 || William G. Cobb (ECF No. 4) is accepted and adopted in full. 15 It is further ordered that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF 16 || No. 1) is granted. 17 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court detach and file the complaint (ECF No. 18 |] 1-1). 19 It is furthered ordered that the Complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is dismissed with prejudice. 20 The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this order and close this 21 || case. 22 23 24 DATED THIS 3% day of September 2020. 25 26 ate DU 27 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28