Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1637, AFL-CIO et al v. Veolia Transportation Services, Inc.
Filing
48
ORDER Adopting 47 Report and Recommendation to Deny 39 MOTION to Vacate Arbitration Award. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1637s MOTION to vacate arbitration award 39 is DENIED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/1/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION
LOCAL 1637, et al.,
2:11-CV-1986 JCM (CWH)
9
Plaintiffs,
10
11
v.
12
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION
SERVICES, INC.,
13
Defendant.
14
15
16
ORDER
17
Presently before the court is Magistrate Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation that
18
plaintiff Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1637’s motion to vacate arbitration award (doc. # 39)
19
be denied. (Doc. # 47). No objections to the report and recommendation have been filed.
20
This court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
21
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)©. Where a party timely
22
objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is required to “make a de
23
novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is
24
made.” Id.
25
Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all
26
. . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
27
Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v. Reyna-
2
Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the district
3
court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objects were made); see also
4
Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s
5
decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review “any
6
issue that is not the subject of an objection.”). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s
7
recommendation, then this court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g.,
8
Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation
9
to which no object was filed).
10
Nevertheless, this court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine
11
whether to adopt the recommendation of the magistrate judge. Upon reviewing plaintiff’s motion
12
requesting the court to vacate the arbitration award (doc. # 39), defendant Veolia Transportation
13
Services, Inc’s response (doc. # 40), plaintiff’s reply (doc. # 42), and Magistrate Judge Hoffman’s
14
comprehensive report and recommendation (doc. # 47), this court finds good cause to adopt the
15
magistrate judge’s findings in full.
16
Accordingly,
17
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the report and
18
recommendation of Magistrate Judge Hoffman denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate arbitration award
19
(doc. # 47) be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED in its entirety.
20
21
22
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1637’s motion
to vacate arbitration award (doc. # 39) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
DATED February 1, 2013.
23
24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-2-
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
