1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * *

7 MICHAEL LANG, Case No.2:24-CV-1682 JCM (BNW)

8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 v.

10 DOUGLAS AT STONELAKE,

11 Defendant(s).

12 13 Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Weksler’s report and recommendation 14 (“R&R”) to dismiss this action without prejudice. (ECF No. 9). The court may dismiss an action 15 based on a party’s failure to prosecute his case or comply with a court order. (Id. at 1). After 16 considering the factors set forth in Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv.,

(9th Cir. 1987), Judge 17 Weksler recommends that this case be dismissed. (Id. at 2). 18 No objections were filed to the R&R. Thus, the court is not obligated to conduct a de novo 19 review of the R&R.

(b)(1) (requiring courts to “make a de novo determination of 20 those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made”); United 21 States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“[T]he district judge must 22 review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 23 otherwise.”). 24 Accordingly, 25 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Judge Weksler’s R&R 26 (ECF No. 9) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED, in full. 27 . . . 28 . . . 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk 2 of the court is INSTRUCTED to enter judgment in favor of defendant and close this case. 3 DATED March 31, 2025. 4 ______________________________________ 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28