Mayo v. Williams, 2:16-cv-00047-APG-VCF. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20190927e46
Visitors: 2
Filed: Sep. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 26, 2019
Summary: Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case [ECF No. 93] ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . On September 5, 2019, Magistrate Judge Ferenbach recommended that I dismiss this case with prejudice because plaintiff Arthur Mayo failed to update his address, did not respond to court orders, failed to file a response to an order to show cause, and did not appear at a show cause hearing. ECF No. 93. Mayo did not file an objection. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo re
Summary: Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case [ECF No. 93] ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . On September 5, 2019, Magistrate Judge Ferenbach recommended that I dismiss this case with prejudice because plaintiff Arthur Mayo failed to update his address, did not respond to court orders, failed to file a response to an order to show cause, and did not appear at a show cause hearing. ECF No. 93. Mayo did not file an objection. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo rev..
More
Order Accepting Report and Recommendation and Dismissing Case
[ECF No. 93]
ANDREW P. GORDON, District Judge.
On September 5, 2019, Magistrate Judge Ferenbach recommended that I dismiss this case with prejudice because plaintiff Arthur Mayo failed to update his address, did not respond to court orders, failed to file a response to an order to show cause, and did not appear at a show cause hearing. ECF No. 93. Mayo did not file an objection. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made"); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) ("the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise" (emphasis in original)).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Ferenbach's report and recommendation (ECF No. 93) is accepted and plaintiff Arthur Mayo's amended complaint (ECF No. 64) is DISMISSED with prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to enter judgment in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff.
Source: Leagle
