Jose Abel Perez v. City of North Las Vegas, et al.

District Court, D. Nevada

Jose Abel Perez v. City of North Las Vegas, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 JOSE ABEL PEREZ, 4 Plaintiff, Case No.: 2:24-cv-00918-GMN-MDC 5 vs. 6 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, et. al., RECOMMENDATION 7 Defendants. 8

9 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), (ECF No. 18), 10 of United States Magistrate Maximiliano D. Couvillier III, which recommends dismissing 11 Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice and without leave to amend based on Plaintiff’s failure 12 to comply with the Court’s order to file a Third Amended Complaint. 13 A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a 14 United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(B); 15 D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo 16 determination of those portions to which objections are made if the Magistrate Judge’s findings 17 and recommendations concern matters that may not be finally determined by a magistrate 18 judge. D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the 19 findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); D. Nev. R. 20 IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is not required to conduct “any 21 review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn,

474 U.S. 22

140, 149 (1985) (citing

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a 23 district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s R&R where no objections have been 24 filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia,

328 F.3d 1114, 1122

(9th Cir. 2003). 25 Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. (See R&R, ECF 1 || No. 18) (setting a July 29, 2025, deadline for objections). 2 Accordingly, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 18), is 4 || ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice based 6 Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court’s order to file a Third Amended Complaint. 7 Dated this _14_ day of October, 2025. : i, Gloria M. Majvarro, District Judge 10 United District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 2 of 2

Reference

Status
Unknown