Smith v. Washoe County

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA Robert Lonnell Smith, Jr., Case No. 2:23-cv-01183-CDS-DJA 5 Plaintiff Order Adopting Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Granting Plaintiff’s 6 v. Motion to Amend, and Denying as Moot Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Washoe County, et al., 8 Defendants [ECF Nos. 24, 35, 39] 10 Plaintiff Robert Lonnell Smith, Jr. sues multiple defendants for events that took place while he was a pretrial detainee at the Washoe County Detention Facility. Compl., ECF No. 1-2.

12 In screening Smith’s complaint, the court allowed his Fourteenth Amendment conditions-of- confinement and equal protection violations claims to proceed and dismissed his claims for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Screening order, ECF No. 6 at 10.

15 Smith now moves for leave to amend his complaint to include four new defendants: Sgt. Jenkins, Andrew Barrett-Venn, Darrin Rice, and Devonte German. Mot. to Amend, ECF No. 35. United States Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts reviewed Smith’s motion to amend and recommends that I grant it. R&R, ECF No. 39. For that reason, he also recommends that the pending motion to dismiss targeting the original complaint be denied as moot. Id. at 5. The parties had until December 25, 2024,1 to file any objections to the R&R. Id. at 5–6 (citing LR IB 3-2(a) (stating that parties wishing to object to an R&R must file objections within fourteen)); see also 28 22 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (same). As of the date of this order, there are no objections nor has any party requested more time to file an objection. “[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed.” Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1Because December 25, 2024, is a holiday, the deadline to object is continued to the next day. Fed. R. Civ. 26 P. 6(a)(1)(C) (when deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, it is continued to the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday).

1] 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Because no party objects to Judge Albregts’s findings and recommendations, the R@R is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

4 Conclusion 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [ECF No. 39] is accepted and adopted in its entirety; therefore, Smith’s motion for leave to amend 7|| [ECF No. 35] is granted. The Clerk of Court is instructed to detach and separately file the first amended complaint (ECF No. 35-1).

9 IT 1S FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss [ECF No. 24] is denied as moot.

Ul Dated: January 16, 2025 J, / 12 f Yo.

B Cristina D. silva . oe d States District Judge