Klobas v. United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA KIMBERLY KLOBAS and LANCE CASE NO. C23-6072 BHS RAIKOGLO, ORDER 9 Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 12 Defendants.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Theresa L. Fricke’s Report and Recommendation, (R&R), Dkt. 8, recommending the Court deny pro se plaintiffs Lance Raikoglo and Kimberly Klobas’s applications to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the case without prejudice for failure to state a plausible claim.

Judge Fricke Ordered plaintiffs to show cause why their complaints should not be dismissed, or to file an amended complaint addressing the identified deficiencies. Dkt. 3.

Raikoglo and Klobas filed identical amended complaints, Dkts. 4, 5, but they did not address or remedy the deficiencies, and the R&R correctly concludes that they have failed to state a plausible claim.

1 A district court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed finding or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 3 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (emphasis added); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). “The statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A proper objection requires “specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations” in the R&R. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).

9 Plaintiffs have not objected to the R&R’s recommended dismissal of their claim.

10 The record reflects that the R&R addressed to Klobas and Raikoglo, at 1524 E 32nd Apt.

11 301 Tacoma WA 98404, was returned as undeliverable. Klobas and Raikoglo came into the clerk’s office on or about February 15, 2024, confirmed that their address was correct, and stated they intended to file a motion for an extension of time to object to the R&R. They have not done so, but they did file a new, substantially similar case, Cause No. 24- cv-5128 DGE.

16 The R&R is ADOPTED. Plaintiffs’ application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and this case is DIMSSED without prejudice. Raikoglo’s Motion to Seal, Dkt.

18 7, asks the Court to seal future filings in the case. That motion is DENIED as moot.

19 The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case.

20 IT IS SO ORDERED.

21 \\ 22 \\ 1 \\ 2 Dated this 27th day of February, 2024.

A BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge