Kurth et al v. Holston et al
ORDER that Plaintiff shall file his Certificate as to Interested Parties, which fully complies with LR 7.1-1 no later than 4:00 p.m., November 10, 2011. Failure to comply may result in the issuance of an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 10/27/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
LEANDER B. HOLSTON, et al.,
Case No. 2:11-cv-01638-JCM-PAL
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s failure to file a Certificate as to Interested Parties as
required by LR 7.1-1. The Complaint (Dkt. #1) in this matter was filed October 11, 2011. No Answer
has been filed. LR 7.1-1(a) requires, unless otherwise ordered, that in all cases (except habeas corpus
cases) pro se litigants and counsel for private parties shall, upon entering a case, identify in the
disclosure statement required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 all persons, associations of persons, firms,
partnerships or corporations (including parent corporations) which have a direct, pecuniary interest in
the outcome of the case. LR 7.1-1(b) further states that if there are no known interested parties, other
than those participating in the case, a statement to that effect must be filed. Additionally, LR 7.1-1(c)
requires a party to promptly file a supplemental certification upon any change in the information that
this rule requires. To date, Plaintiff has failed to comply. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff shall file his Certificate as to Interested Parties, which fully
complies with LR 7.1-1 no later than 4:00 p.m., November 10, 2011. Failure to comply may result in
the issuance of an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.
Dated this 27th day of October, 2011.
Peggy A. Leen
United States Magistrate Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.