Muric-Dorado v. LVMPD

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * RAMON MURIC-DORADO, Case No. 2:18-CV-1184 JCM (EJY) 8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 v. LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendant(s).

Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah’s order and report and recommendation (“R&R”). (ECF No. 165). Also before the court is pro se plaintiff Ramon Muric-Dorado’s motion for the court to accept the R&R. (ECF No. 169).

No objections were made to the R&R. Thus, the court is not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring 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-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“[T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” (emphasis in original)).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Judge Youchah’s R&R (ECF No. 165) be, and the same hereby is, ACCEPTED. . . . . . . . . .

1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Muric-Dorado’s motion (ECF No. 169) be, and the 2| same hereby is, DENIED as moot.

3 DATED June 16, 2021.

4 ee itas C. Aalan 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE es C. Mahan District Judge _2-