Maida v. United States

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * GINA MAIDA Case No. 2:24-cv-02375-RFB-MDC 8 Plaintiff, ORDER 9 v. UNITED STATES., Defendants.

14 Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 15) of the Honorable Maximiliano D. Couvillier, III, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on June 20, 2025. For the following reasons, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in full.

17 A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 20 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed the district court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct “any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge.

25 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Here, objections were due by July 7, 2025. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation.

28 /// ] IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 15) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice, as 4} amendment would be futile.

5 The Clerk of Court is instructed to close this case.

7 DATED: July 18, 2025. □□ 10 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2-