3:23-cv-00197•Smith v. Pursuit Collection, Alaska Talkeetna Lodge et al
Smith v. Pursuit Collection, Alaska Talkeetna Lodge et al
3:23-cv-00197Akd11.04.2024
Gesamter Gesetzestext
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA BRIAN MITCHELL SMITH, Plaintiff, v. PURSUIT COLLECTION, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:23-cv-00197-SLG-KFR ORDER RE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Before the Court at Docket 1 is Plaintiff Brian Smith’s Complaint Under the Civil Rights Act (Non-Prisoner) (“Complaint”). The matter was referred to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Kyle F. Reardon. At Docket 6, Judge Reardon issued a Screening Order finding that Plaintiff’s Complaint was deficient but granting Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint or a Voluntary Notice of Dismissal by March 4, 2024. As of March 21, 2024, Plaintiff did not file an Amended Complaint or a Voluntary Notice of Dismissal. At Docket 7, Judge Reardon issued his Report and Recommendation, in which he recommended that the action be dismissed without prejudice and that all pending motions be denied as moot. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). That statute provides that a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in Case 3:23-cv-00197-SLG-KFR Document 8 Filed 04/11/24 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 3:23-cv-00197-SLG-KFR, Smith v. Pursuit Collection, et al. Order re Report and Recommendation Page 2 of 2 part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”1 A court is to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge’s report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”2 However, § 636(b)(1) does not “require district court review of a magistrate’s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”3 The magistrate judge recommended that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice and that all pending motions be denied as moot. The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and agrees with its analysis. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, and IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice and any pending motions are DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court shall issue a final judgment. DATED this 11th day of April, 2024, at Anchorage, Alaska. /s/ Sharon L. Gleason UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 2 Id. 3 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Case 3:23-cv-00197-SLG-KFR Document 8 Filed 04/11/24 Page 2 of 2
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.