Moreno v. State of Nevada

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA LORENZO MORENO, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:25-CV-00094-ART-CLB 6 v. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND STATE OF NEVADA, RECOMMENDATION 8 Defendant.

10 Before the Court is Plaintiff Lorenzo Moreno’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 4) and Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin’s report and recommendation (R&R) (ECF No. 5). The R&R recommends that the Court dismiss Moreno’s complaint with prejudice and deny his IFP application as moot.

14 Magistrate judges are empowered to issue reports and recommendations on dispositive issues, which district judges may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Where, as here, neither party objects to a magistrate judge's recommendation, the district court is not required to perform any review of that judge's conclusions. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985).

20 Judge Baldwin screens Moreno’s complaint and explains that he does not list any claims for relief or provide sufficient information to determine which causes of action he wishes to proceed under. (ECF No. 5 at 3–4.) Judge Baldwin recommends dismissing the complaint without leave to amend because amendment would be futile. (Id. at 4.) Judge Baldwin also recommends that Moreno not be assessed the filing fee. (Id. at 2.)

26 Moreno has not objected to Judge Baldwin’s R&R, and his time to do so has now expired. The Court agrees with Judge Baldwin’s reasoning and adopts her R&R in full.

1 || Conclusion 2 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s report and recommendation || (ECF No. 5) is adopted in full.

4 It is further ordered that Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1-1) is dismissed || with prejudice.

6 It is further ordered that Plaintiff's IFP application (ECF No. 4) is denied as || moot.

8 The Clerk of Court is instructed to close this case and enter judgment || accordingly.

11 DATED: March 26, 2025 13 een Pee Massed 18 ANNER TRAUM 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE