Mehta v. Nutribullet, L.L.C.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA JAGDISH MEHTA, Case No.: 2:20-cv-01550-APG-DJA 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Denying Motion for v. Leave to Amend NUTRIBULLET, LLC, et al., [ECF Nos. 28, 31] 7 Defendants 8 On January 5, 2021, Magistrate Judge Albregts recommended that I deny plaintiff Jagdish Mehta’s motion for leave to amend his complaint to add a new defendant who would 10}| destroy diversity jurisdiction if added. ECF No. 31. Mehta did not file an objection. Thus, I am obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made’); United States v. Reyna- 14} Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the 15}| magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 16}| otherwise” (emphasis in original)).

17 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Albregts’ report and recommendation (ECF No. 31) is accepted, and plaintiff Jagdish Mehta’s motion for leave to amend (ECF No. 28) is DENIED.

20 DATED this 2nd day of February, 2021.

21 OEE.

ANDREWP.GORDON.

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE