Goodin v. Laporte
2:24-cv-02156
D. Nev.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs, including Lance Goodin, filed a pro se Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a proposed Complaint in the District of Nevada.
- Judge Maximiliano D. Couvillier screened the Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), identifying several fatal defects and recommending dismissal without leave to amend.
- Judge Couvillier briefly vacated his Report and Recommendation (R&R) thinking he had jurisdiction to issue an order under General Order 2023-11, but later concluded he lacked such jurisdiction and reinstated the R&R.
- Plaintiffs were notified of the reinstated R&R and were given until December 31, 2024, to file written objections, but failed to do so.
- Judge Richard F. Boulware II reviewed the case record, found no objections, and adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendations in full, ordering the case closed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Complaint should proceed despite defects | Not specified | Not specified | Dismissal without leave to amend |
| Procedural handling of R&R and jurisdiction | Not specified | Not specified | R&R reinstated, proper procedure |
| Allowance for objections to R&R | Not contested | Not specified | No objections filed, R&R adopted |
| In Forma Pauperis application viability | Plaintiffs filed motion | Not specified | Denied as Complaint dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (holding that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report when no objections are filed)