United States District Court, D. Nevada
July 28, 2015
KEVIN L. PERRIGO, Plaintiff,
PREMIUM ASSET SERVICES, LLC, Defendant.
GLORIA M. NAVARRO, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen, (ECF No. 16), which states that Plaintiff’s Amended Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 14), should be granted in part.
A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). 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, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).
Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 16), is ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiffs Amended Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 14), is GRANTED IN PART, pursuant to Judge Leen’s recommendation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that default judgment be entered in Plaintiffs favor, and that Plaintiff be awarded a total of:
a. $1, 000.00 in statutory damages and $1, 275.00 in attorney’s fees and costs under the under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a);
b. $1, 500.00 in statutory damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Amended Motion for Default Judgment is DENIED in all other respects.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs proposed Default Judgement, (ECF No. 15), is DENIED as moot.
The Clerk is instructed to close the case.