Tutankhaman v. Lewis

District Court, D. Nevada

Tutankhaman v. Lewis

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 Case No.: 2:22-cv-1865-JAD-EJY 4 King Michael Tutankhaman,

5 Plaintiff Order Adopting Report & Recommendation 6 and Dismissing Action v. 7 Nigel Lewis, et al., 8 [ECF Nos. 1, 3]

9 Defendants 10 11 Plaintiff Juris Superior Chief Justice King Michael Tutankhaman, aka King Dr. Michael 12 Dumpledore II, aka The Royal Angel, aka The Royal Baby Angel, aka Dr. Maxwell, aka The 13 Marisan Citizen initiated this action with an incoherent 152-page filing and an application to 14 proceed in forma pauperis.1 The magistrate judge reviewed the complaint, characterizes it as 15 “suffer[ing] from delusional and frivolous allegations on which [p]laintiff cannot possibly 16 prevail,” and issued a report and recommendation to dismiss this case with prejudice.2 The 17 deadline for the plaintiff to object to that recommendation passed a week ago, and the plaintiff 18 neither filed objections nor moved to extend the deadline to do so. “[N]o review is required of a 19 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed.”3 Having reviewed 20 the R&R, I find good cause to adopt it, and I do.

21 22 23 24

25 26 1 ECF No. 1. 27 2 ECF No. 3. 28 3 United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003). ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and 2 || recommendation [ECF No. 3] is ADOPTED in full; this case is dismissed with prejudice as 3 || frivolous and delusional, and the application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 4 || [ECF No. 1] is DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT 5 || ACCORDINGLY and CLOSE THIS CASE. cine 7 US. District Fudge Jen uifer A. Dorsey 8 Dated: November 28, 2022 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown