1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * * 6 JOHNNY PARTIDA, et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-00346-MMD-WGC

7 Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 8 FBI, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiffs Johnny Partida and Amber Fuchslin bring this action under 42

. (ECF No. 1-1 (“Complaint”).) Before the Court is the Report and 13 Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) of United States Magistrate Judge 14 William G. Cobb (ECF No. 5), recommending the Court dismiss this action without 15 prejudice. Partida and Fuchslin had until September 30, 2021, to file an objection. (Id. at 16 2.) To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed. For this reason, and as explained 17 below, the Court adopts the R&R, and will dismiss the action without prejudice. 18 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 19 recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Where a party 20 fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not required to 21 conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas 22 v. Arn,

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

, 23 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and 24 recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the 25 findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory 26 Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no 27 clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 1 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is 2 || satisfied Judge Cobb did not clearly err. Judge Cobb recommends that the Court dismiss 3 || this action without prejudice because Fuchslin failed to file an application to proceed in 4 || forma pauperis (“IFP”) within 30 days and Fuchslin and Partida failed with submit a 5 || complaint with both of their signatures, in compliance with this Court’s August 11, 2021, 6 || order. (ECF Nos. 4, 5.) LR IA 11-8 states that “[t]he court may, after notice and an 7 || Opportunity to be heard, impose any and all appropriate sanctions on an attorney or party 8 || who: . .. (e) [flails to comply with an order of this court.” The complaint listed Partida and 9 || Fuchslin as Plaintiffs, but only Partida signed the document, and only Partida filed an IFP 10 || application. (ECF Nos. 1, 1-1.) Because Partida did not provide any information indicating 11 || that he is an attorney who is admitted to practice in Nevada or any other state, the Court 12 || informed Plaintiffs that Partida may not initiate a civil complaint or submit an IFP 13 || application on Fuchslin’s behalf. (ECF No. 4 at 1.) See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a) (stipulating 14 || that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one 15 || attorney of record in the attorney's name—or by a party personally if the party is 16 || unrepresented.”). To date, Partida and Fuchslin have not submitted a complaint with both 17 || of their signatures and Fuchslin has not submitted an IFP application. Thus, the Court 18 || agrees with Judge Cobb and will adopt the R&R in full. 19 It is therefore ordered that Judge Cobb’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 20 || accepted and adopted in full. 21 It is further ordered that this action is dismissed without prejudice based on Partida 22 || and Fuchslin’s failure to file a complaint that has both of their signatures and Fuchslin’s 23 || failure to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, in compliance with this Court’s 24 || August 11, 2021, order. (ECF No. 4.) 25 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. 26 DATED THIS 5" Day of October 2021. _

28 MIRANDA CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE