State National Insurance Company, Inc. v. Diversified Concrete Cutting, Inc.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA STATE NATIONAL INSURANCE ) COMPANY, INC. and ALLEGHENY ) CASUALTY COMPANY, ) Case No.: 2:18-cv-00687-GMN-EJY ) 6 Plaintiff, ) ORDER vs. ) 7 ) DIVERSIFIED CONCRETE CUTTING, ) INC., a Nevada Corporation; MERCURIO ) EQUIPMENT, LTD., a Nevada Limited ) Liability Company; DEMO-TECH, LTD., a ) Nevada Limited Liability Company; BRANDT ) CHILDREN’S TRUST, a trust created by and ) for Individuals residing in the State of Nevada; ) KENNETH M. MERCURIO, an Individual; ) DOES I THROUGH X, Inclusive; ROE ) CORPORATIONS I THROUGH X, Inclusive, ) ) 14 Defendants. ) ) 16 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Elayna Youchah, (ECF No. 22), which recommends that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment be denied without prejudice. The R&R also recommends that Plaintiffs refile the Motion for Entry of Default Judgment and serve it upon each Defendant. (R&R 7:13– 14).

21 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. 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).

6 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so, December 24, 2020, has passed. (See Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 22).

8 Accordingly, 9 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 22), is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED in full.

11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 21) is DISMISSED without prejudice.1 13 DATED this __2_0__ day of January, 2021.

16 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 17 United States District Court The Court notes that Plaintiffs have already complied with the R&R by renewing their Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 23), and serving it upon Defendants, (ECF No. 24).