2

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 RICHARD JOHNSTON, Case No. 3:23-cv-00408-MMD-CLB

7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 ROBERT HARTMAN, et al., 9 Defendants. 10 11 Plaintiff Richard Johnston, an inmate at Northern Nevada Correctional Center, 12 brings this civil rights action against Defendants Kayla Dorame, Robert Hartman, Martha 13 Simas, Sandra Walker, April Regan, Kathy Swain, Nethanjah Breitenbach, and Harold 14 Wickman (“Defendants”). Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Carla 15 Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 56 (“R&R”)), recommending that the 16 Court deny Johnston’s motion of supplementation (ECF No. 49) and motion to extend 17 time (ECF No. 55) as moot and recommending that Defendant Dorame be dismissed from 18 this action. Plaintiff had until August 25, 2025 to file an objection. To date, no objection 19 has been filed. For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R in full. 20 Because there was no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review. See 21 United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of 22 the magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one or 23 both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original). 24 As to Johnston’s motion to extend time, Johnston filed two motions to extend time. (ECF 25 Nos. 52, 55.) The Court granted the motion to extend that Johnston filed on August 1, 26 2025. (ECF No. 54.) Because the remaining motion to extend is thus duplicative, Judge 27 Baldwin recommended denying it as moot. (ECF No. 56 at 1.) As to Johnston’s motion of 28 supplementation, on June 25, 2025, a notice of suggestion of death was filed as to 1 || Defendant Dorame. (ECF No. 45.) Johnston then filed the motion of supplementation 2 || seeking to substitute various Defendants for Dorame. Defendants opposed the motion, 3 || arguing it should be denied (ECF No. 51) and Johnston replied, asking the Court to 4 || dismiss Defendant Dorame from this action (ECF No. 53). In light of the above, and that 5 || Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d) provides for automatic substitution of a party upon 6 || death of a public officer, Judge Baldwin recommended dismissing Johnston’s motion for 7 || supplementation as moot. (ECF No. 56 at 2.) The Court is satisfied that Judge Baldwin 8 || did not clearly err. 9 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF 10 || No. 56) is accepted and adopted in full. 11 It is further ordered that Johnston’s motion to extend time (ECF No. 55) is denied 12 || as moot. 13 It is further ordered that Johnston’s motion of supplementation (ECF No. 49) is 14 || denied as moot. 15 It is further ordered that Defendant Dorame is dismissed from this action. 16 DATED THIS 18" Day of September 2025.

18 MIRANDA M. DU 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28