Khan v. Saul

District Court, D. Nevada

Khan v. Saul

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * *

5 MARSHALL A. KHAN, Case No. 2:21-cv-00003-KJD-VCF

6 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 7 v. RECOMMENDATION

8 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 9 Defendant. 10 Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF #8) 11 containing the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach entered 12 January 25, 2021, recommending that Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied 13 and the case administratively closed. Plaintiff did not file an objection but filed multiple 14 documents in opposition to the report and recommendation, including a Petition for Judicial 15 Review (ECF #10), Motion for Exclusive Rights (ECF #11), Motion for Estoppel against the 16 Government (ECF #12), and Motion for Entry of Clerk’s Default Judgment (ECF #15). 17 The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record in this case in accordance with 18

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1) and LR IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Report and 19 Recommendation (ECF #8) containing the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge 20 Ferenbach, entered January 25, 2021, should be ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. Plaintiff argues 21 that the magistrate judge may not participate in the litigation because Plaintiff did not consent to 22 a magistrate judge hearing his case. “Pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b), a magistrate is authorized 23 to prepare a report and recommendation that disposes of a claim or defense, and no consent of 24 the parties is necessary.” Venegas v. United States, No. 89-55026,

921 F.2d 282

, at *1 (9th Cir. 25 1990) (unpublished). The magistrate judge properly submitted a report and recommendation that 26 this Court reviewed in making its determination. 27 // 28 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF #8) is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all remaining motions are DENIED as moot. 4 IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the case be administratively closed. 5 | Dated this 23rd day of February, 2021. 6 —~ Li Kent J. Dawson 8 United States District Judge 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-

Reference

Status
Unknown