Summary
This United States District Court order adopts a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation after determining that no party filed timely objections. Following a de novo review of the record, the court accepted the recommendation and dismissed several named defendants, including Clark County and its District Attorney’s Office, with prejudice. The dismissal resulted from a mandatory screening of the plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court must conduct a de novo review of a magistrate’s report when no objections are filed.
Holdings
- The district court may adopt the magistrate’s Report and Recommendation in full without a de novo review when no objections are filed.
- The plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint, which will be screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1951(a).
Key quotations
“IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 7) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.” (at 1)
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Steve Wolfson, William Merback, Kayla Simmons, Kassandra Acosta and Clark County District Attorney’s Office are DISMISSED from this action with prejudice.” (at 1)
Factual background
Corey Dane Smith filed a complaint against Clark County and several individual defendants. The magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation proposing dismissal. The plaintiff filed no objections and later filed an amended complaint.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed complaint; Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation; no objections were filed; district court reviewed and adopted the report in full.