1

2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 BRANDON MICHAEL GAMINO, Case No. 3:23-cv-00205-ART-CLB 6 Plaintiff, ORDER 7 v.

8 WENDELL DWIGHT EMERSON,

9 Defendant. 10 Pro se Plaintiff Brandon Michael Gamino brings this action under 42

seeking damages for alleged constitutional violations arising from 12 a criminal proceeding in California resulting in what Plaintiff alleges was an 13 illegal incarceration. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R” 14 or “Recommendation”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin (ECF 15 No. 3) screening the complaint and recommending this action be dismissed 16 without prejudice. The R&R also recommends that Plaintiff’s application to 17 proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1 (“IFP Application”)) be denied as moot. 18 Plaintiff had until June 2, 2023 to file an objection. To date, no objection to the 19 R&R has been filed. For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts 20 the R&R, and will dismiss the case without prejudice. 21 The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 22 or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). Where 23 a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the Court is not 24 required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of 25 an objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); see also United States v. 26 Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the 27 magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one 28 1 || or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis 2 || in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that 3 || the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the 4 || record in order to accept the recommendation.”). 5 Because there is no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review 6 || and is satisfied Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. Here, Judge Baldwin 7 || recommends dismissing the action without prejudice because the Court lacks 8 || personal jurisdiction over the Defendant and because venue is improper in this 9 || District. (ECF No. 3 at 4.) The Court agrees with Judge Baldwin. Having reviewed 10 || the R&R and the record in this case, the Court will adopt the R&R in full. 11 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judge Baldwin’s Report and 12 || Recommendation (ECF No. 3) is accepted and adopted in full. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's IFP Application (ECF No. 1) is 14 || denied as moot. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk file the complaint. (ECF No. 1- 16 || 1.) 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint (ECF No. 1-1) be 18 |} DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the extent that Plaintiff can assert 19 || plausible claims for relief in the court. 20 The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close 21 || this action. 22 23 DATED THIS 9t day of November 2023. 24 25 Ars pled 7d 26 ANNE R. TRAUM 57 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

28