1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 CLARENCE D. JOHNSON, JR., Case No. 3:21-cv-00076-MMD-WGC

7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 ANGELA BYERS, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Clarence D. Johnson, Jr. brings this action under

. 12 Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) of 13 United States Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (ECF No. 6), recommending Johnson’s 14 application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied, dismissing the action with prejudice 15 and denying the remaining motions (ECF Nos. 1-2, 1-4, 1-5, 4, 5) as moot. Johnson had 16 until April 12, 2021 to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed. 17 For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R, and will deny 18 Johnson’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, dismiss this action with prejudice, 19 and deny the remaining pending motions. 20 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 21 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Where a party 22 fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to 23 conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas 24 v. Arn,

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

, 25 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and 26 recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the 27 findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory 1 || Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 2 || clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 3 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is 4 || satisfied Judge Cobb did not clearly err. Here, Judge Cobb recommends the application 5 || to proceed in forma pauperis be denied because Johnson submitted the incorrect form 6 || and it was not signed. (ECF No. 6 at 3.) Judge Cobb also recommends the action be 7 || dismissed with prejudice because there is no legal basis for any claim asserted and the 8 || documents are nonsensical and frivolous, with the other pending motions denied as moot. 9 || (/d.) The Court agrees with Judge Cobb. Having reviewed the R&R and the record in this 10 || case, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 11 It is therefore ordered that Judge Cobb’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 12 || 6) is accepted and adopted in full. 13 It is further ordered that Johnson’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF 14 || No. 3) is denied. 15 It is further ordered that the action is dismissed with prejudice. 16 It is further ordered that the remaining pending motions (ECF Nos. 1-2, 1-4, 1-5, 17 || 4, 5) are denied as moot. 18 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case. 19 DATED THIS 27" Day of April 2021. 20 21 A, ( ( ) _ 22 IRANDA M. DU 33 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24 25 26 27 28