1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 DENZEL DORSEY, Case No. 2:22-cv-01393-ART-BNW

7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 STATE OF NEVADA 9 Defendant. 10 11 Pro se Plaintiff Denzel Dorsey brings this action under

. 12 In ECF No. 1, Plaintiff failed to include a complaint with his filing of an in forma 13 pauperis application. In ECF No. 2, Magistrate Judge Weksler ordered Plaintiff 14 to file a complaint by September 26, 2022. Plaintiff has not taken any 15 subsequent action in this case in accordance with Magistrate Judge Weksler’s 16 order. (ECF No. 2). Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” 17 or “Recommendation”) of United States Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler (ECF 18 No. 3), recommending that: 1) Plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice; 19 and 2) Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application (ECF No. 1) be denied as moot. 20 Plaintiff had until October 25, 2022, to file an objection. To date, no objection to 21 the R&R has been filed. For this reason, and as explained below, the Court 22 adopts the R&R, and will take the recommended actions. 23 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 24 or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Where 25 a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not 26 required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of 27 an objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); see also United States v. 28 Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the 1 || magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one 2 || or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis 3 || in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that 4 || the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the 5 || record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 6 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, 7 || and is satisfied Judge Weksler did not clearly err. Here, Judge Weksler ordered 8 || Plaintiff to submit a complaint by September 26, 2022. (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff 9 || failed to do so. Judge Weksler therefore recommends that Plaintiff's case be 10 || dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to file the complaint. (ECF 11 || No. 3 at 1.) The Court agrees with Judge Weksler. Having reviewed the R&R and 12 || the record in this case, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 13 It is therefore ordered that Judge Weksler’s Report and Recommendation 14 || (ECF No. 3) is accepted and adopted in full. 15 It is further ordered that Plaintiffs in forma pauperis application (ECF No. 16 || 1) be denied as moot. 17 It is further ordered that this case be dismissed without prejudice. 18 The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. 19 20 DATED THIS 18t* Day of July 2023. 21 22 Ares jlosead iden 23 ANNE R.TRAUM ———C:*™ 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25 26 27 28