Overstreet v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA ENEDINA OVERSTREET, ) 4 ) Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 2:22-cv-01252-GMN-EJY vs. ) 6 ) ORDER WAL-MART STORES, INC., et al., ) 7 ) Defendants. ) ) ) 10 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF No. 12), of United States Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah, which recommends denying Plaintiff Enedina Overstreet’s (“Plaintiff’s”) Motion to Amend, (ECF No. 7), for filing it in bad faith.

13 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

18 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s R&R where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 23 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

24 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See Min. Order, ECF No. 12) (setting an October 13, 2022, deadline for objections).

1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 12), is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend, (ECF No. 7), is DENIED.

6 Dated this __3__ day of January, 2023.

8 ___________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge 9 United States District Court