1 2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 MATTHEW RAMIREZ, Case No. 3:20-cv-00300-MMD-CSD

7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 ALFREDO MONTES, 9 Defendant. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Matthew Ramirez brings this action under

. Before 12 the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” or “Recommendation”) of United 13 States Magistrate Judge Craig S. Denney (ECF No. 37) recommending the Court deny 14 Defendant Alfredo Montes’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 25 (“Motion”)). 15 Montes had until August 31, 2022, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R 16 has been filed. For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R, and 17 will deny the Motion. 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.”). 28 /// 1 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is 2 || satisfied Judge Denney did not clearly err. Here, Judge Denney recommends denying 3 || Montes’ Motion because his proffered evidence does not establish he is entitled to 4 || summary judgment—or qualified immunity, because, “it was clearly established that using 5 || force maliciously for the purpose of causing harm violates the Eighth Amendment.” (ECF 6 || No. 37 at 6-7.) The Court agrees with Judge Denney. Having reviewed the R&R and the 7 || record in this case, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 8 It is therefore ordered that Judge Denney’s Report and Recommendation (ECF 9 || No. 37) is accepted and adopted in full. 10 It is further ordered that Montes’ Motion (ECF No. 25) is denied. 11 It is further ordered that, pursuant to LR 16-5, the Court finds that it is appropriate 12 || to refer this case to Judge Denney to conduct a settlement conference. If the parties do 13 || not settle, the Joint Pretrial Order is due within 30 days of the date the settlement 14 || conference is held. 15 DATED THIS 8"" Day of September 2022. 16

18 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 19 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28