From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Mathur

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Oct 3, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cr-00312-MMD-PAL (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:11-cr-00312-MMD-PAL

10-03-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANIL K. MATHUR, Defendant.


ORDER ACCEPTING REPORTS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE

JUDGE PEGGY A. LEEN

Before the Court are two separate Reports and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen (dkt. nos. 112 & 117) ("Recommendations") relating to Defendant Anil K. Mathur's two Motions to Dismiss (dkt. nos. 48 & 51). No objection to the Recommendations has been filed.

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 the 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 Magistrate Judge Leen's Recommendations. Upon reviewing the Recommendations and the records in this case, this Court finds good cause to adopt the Magistrate Judge's Recommendations in full.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the two Reports and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen (dkt. nos. 112 & 117) be accepted and adopted in their entirety.

_______________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Mathur

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Oct 3, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cr-00312-MMD-PAL (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Mathur

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANIL K. MATHUR, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Oct 3, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:11-cr-00312-MMD-PAL (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2012)

Citing Cases

United States v. Williams

In fact, this Court could find no decision in which a court found § 1320a–7b(b)(1)(A) unconstitutionally…

United States v. Blair

I am not aware of any decision by a federal court finding the AKS void for vagueness. See, e.g., United…