Reed v. Bizzaro

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA MAX REED, Case No.: 2:24-cv-01186-APG-MDC 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case v. [ECF No. 12] AMELIA L. BIZZARO, et al., 7 Defendants 8 On December 16, 2024, Magistrate Judge Couvillier recommended that I dismiss plaintiff Max Reed’s amended complaint without leave to amend and deny his applications to proceed in forma pauperis as moot. ECF No. 12. Reed did not object. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district 12}| courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed 13}| findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 14} Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and 15}|recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)).

16 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Couvillier’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 12) is accepted, and plaintiff Max Reed’s amended complaint (ECF No. 10) is 18} dismissed without leave to amend in this court, but with leave to pursue any state law claims in state court. The motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF Nos. 1, 11) are DENIED moot. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case.

21 DATED this 7th day of January, 2025.

22 Z. - ANDREWP.GORDON.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE