1

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4

5 DWAYNE SNYDER, Case No. 3:23-CV-00363-ART-CSD 6 Plaintiff, vs. ORDER ON REPORT AND 7 RECOMMENDATON OF U.S. M. SORIANO, et al., MAGISTRATE JUDGE (ECF No. 49) 8 Defendants. 9 10 Pro se Plaintiff Dwayne Snyder brings this action against Defendants 11 asserting claims under

. The Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint 12 and allowed him to proceed with a Fourteenth Amendment due process violation 13 claim based on inadequate medical care against Nurse Mike, Deputy P. Poldak, 14 M. Soriano, Deputy R. Mueller, Deputy Baker, Mitchell, Deputy T. Millard, and 15 Doe Defendants if Plaintiff moved to substitute their true names. (ECF No. 4.) 16 Before the Court are Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 38, 17 39.) Plaintiff filed an opposition (ECF Nos. 44, 45) and Defendants filed replies. 18 (ECF Nos. 47, 48.) Magistrate Judge Denney issued a Report and 19 Recommendation (“R&R”) which recommended granting Defendants’ motion for 20 summary judgment on Plaintiff’s claims for failure to exhaust. (ECF No. 49.) 21 Under the Federal Magistrates Act, a court “may accept, reject, or modify, 22 in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by [a] magistrate 23 judge.”

(b)(1). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's 24 report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de novo 25 determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which 26 objection is made.”

(b)(1). A court is not required to conduct “any 27 review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. 28 Arn,

(1985). 1 Plaintiff has not filed an objection to Judge Denney’s report and 2 || recommendation and his time to do so has now expired. (ECF No. 49.) Thus, the 3 || Court is not required to conduct any review. The Court will therefore adopt Judge 4 || Denney’s R&R in full. 5 Conclusion 6 It is therefore ordered that Judge Denney’s Report and Recommendation 7 || (ECF No. 49) is ADOPTED IN FULL. 8 It is further ordered that Defendants’ motions for summary judgment (ECF 9 || Nos. 38, 39) are GRANTED. 10 It is further ordered that the Clerk ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and 11 || CLOSE this case. 12 13 Dated this 13 day of May 2025. 14 18 An [lostd 1m 16 ANNE R. TRAUM 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28