Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Shepard v. Marathon Staffing, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 30, 2014

TANYA C. SHEPARD, Plaintiff(s),
v.
MARATHON STAFFING, INC., Defendant(s)

ORDER

JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.

Presently before the court are Magistrate Judge Leen's report and recommendation. (Doc. # 5). Plaintiff Tanya Shepard has not filed an objection and the deadline in which to do so has expired.

This 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). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, then the court is required to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct "any review at all... of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia , 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone , 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit's decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review "any issue that is not the subject of an objection."). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge's recommendation, then this court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone , 263 F.Supp.2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge's recommendation to which no objection was filed).

Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge screened the complaint, determined that it failed to state a claim, and gave plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint, did not request an extension of time, and has otherwise not participated in the prosecution of her lawsuit. In light of her failure to participate, the magistrate judge recommends that the complaint be dismissed.

Upon reviewing the recommendation and underlying briefs, and in light of plaintiff's failure to object, this court finds good cause appears to ADOPT the magistrate's findings in full.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Magistrate Judge Leen's report and recommendation (doc. # 5) be, and the same hereby are, ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.