United States v. Diedrich

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:19-cv-02134-GMN-VCF vs. )

) ORDER

GREGORY C. DIEDRICH, et al., )

) Defendant. )

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 17), of United States Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach, which states that Plaintiff United States’ Motions for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 12), and Permanent Injunction, (ECF No. 16), should be granted.

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See Min. Order, ECF No. 17) (setting a January 6, 2021, deadline for objections).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 17), is ADOPTED in full.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States’ Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 12), is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States’ Motion for Permanent Injunction, (ECF No. 16), is GRANTED.

Dated this __7__ day of January, 2021.

___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge United States District Court