Woodburn v. City of Henderson
Woodburn v. City of Henderson
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3
4 Kelly Woodburn, Thomas Woodburn, and Case No. 2:19-cv-01488-CDS-DJA Joshua Rodriguez, individually and on 5 behalf of all others similarly situated, Order Adopting the Report and Recommendation of the United States 6 Plaintiffs Magistrate Judge Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant City of 7 v. Henderson’s Motion for Sanctions
8 City of Henderson, et al., [ECF Nos. 205, 210] 9 Defendants
10 11 United States Magistrate Judge Daniel Albregts issued a report and recommendation 12 (R&R) that I dismiss five opt-in plaintiffs from this action for failing to prosecute this case, and 13 that I grant in part and deny in part the City of Henderson’s motion for sanctions. R&R, ECF No. 14 210 (addressing Henderson’s motion for sanctions, ECF No. 205). Judge Albregts recommends 15 dismissal for plaintiffs Arias, Zamora-Rios, Weathers, and Montano pursuant to Federal Rules of 16 Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A) and 41(b). Id. at 4–7. He further recommends that plaintiff Dema be 17 dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Id. at 7. Finally, he recommends 18 dismissal be granted without prejudice for all five of the opt-in plaintiffs. Id. at 8–10. 19 The parties had until January 2, 2025, to lodge any objections to the R&R. See id. at 10–11; 20 Local Rule IB 3-2(a) (stating that parties wishing to object to an R&R must file objections within 21 fourteen days); see also
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (same). As of the date of this order, no objections 22 have been filed. “[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 23 unless objections are filed.” Schmidt v. Johnstone,
263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226(D. Ariz. 2003); see also 24 Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 150(1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,
328 F.3d 1114, 1121(9th Cir. 25 2003). Because no objections are filed, I adopt the R&R in full and grant in part and deny in part 26 the City of Henderson’s motion for sanctions. 1 Conclusion 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [ECF 3 ||No. 210] is adopted in its entirety, therefore the City of Henderson’s motion for sanctions [ECF 4 ||No. 205] is granted in part and denied in part. Opt-in plaintiffs Abresha Dema, Gabriel Arias, 5 |}Octaviano Zamora-Rios, Edward Weathers, and Andrew Montano’s claims are dismissed from 6 action without prejudice and without conditions. 7 Dated: January 15, 2025 J, / yy 9 sth U ited States District Judge 10 i / ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Reference
- Status
- Unknown