Scott v. Quigley

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA JAMES EDWARD SCOTT, III, Case No. 3:23-cv-00264-ART-CLB 8 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 30) 9 v. QUIGLEY, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 Pro se Plaintiff James Edward Scott, III sued Defendants Robert Quigley (“Quigley”) and Melissa Mitchell (“Mitchell”) for allegedly violating his Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights by disclosing existence of Scott’s end-stage renal disease in front of other inmates. Defendants moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. (ECF Nos. 23, 25.) Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending granting Defendants’ motion. (ECF No. 30.) Scott did not file a response to the motion for summary judgment or an objection to Judge Baldwin’s R&R. 20 Under the Federal Magistrates Act, a Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by [a] magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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).

25 Because Scott has not objected to the R&R, the Court is not required to conduct any review. The Court finds Judge Baldwin’s reasoning persuasive and adopts the R&R. // || CONCLUSION 2 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s report and recommendation || (ECF No. 30) is adopted.

4 Accordingly, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 23) is || granted.

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

9 DATED: May 21, 2025 11 en 12 Aru / 13 ANNE R. TRAUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE