Vidal v. City of North Las Vegas

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA FRANCISCO VIDAL, Case No.: 2:25-cv-01724-APG-EJY 4 Plaintiff Order Accepting Report and Recommendation v. [ECF No. 4] 6], CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, et al., 7 Defendants 8 On March 27, 2026, Magistrate Judge Youchah recommended that I dismiss this case without prejudice because plaintiff Francisco Vidal did not pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis by the given deadline. ECF No. 4. Vidal did not object. 11} Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation. 28 12)/U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions 13}| 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 15}| magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 16]| otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 17 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Youchah’s report and recommendation 18]| (ECF No. 4) is accepted, and this case is dismissed without prejudice. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 20 DATED this 18th day of April, 2026. 21 Ge 22 ANDREW P. GORDON 3 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE