Lane v. Clark County

Filing 89

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED THAT 87 plaintiff's "motion to request who has jurisdiction on fraud on the court" be, and the same hereby is, STRICKEN. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT 88 plaintiff's "motion to report alleged fraud and witness tampering" be, and the same hereby is, STRICKEN. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/11/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

RANDEL LANE,

8
9
10

Case No. 2:11-CV-485 JCM (NJK)
Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
CLARK COUNTY,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13
14

Presently before the court is the matter of Lane v. Clark County, case no. 2:11-cv-00485JCM-NJK.

15

On April 25, 2019, plaintiff Randel Lane (“plaintiff”) filed a motion entitled “motion to

16

request who has jurisdiction on fraud on the court.” (ECF No. 87). However, plaintiff’s motion

17

contains no supporting memorandum containing points and authorities, as required by Local Rule

18

7-2(a). See LR 7-2(a). Accordingly, the court will strike the noncompliant document. LR IC 7-1

19

(“The court may strike documents that do not comply with these rules.”).

20

On August 15, 2019, plaintiff filed a motion entitled “motion to report alleged fraud and

21

witness tampering.”

22

memorandum containing points and authorities, as required by Local Rule 7-2(a). See LR 7-2(a).

23

Further, plaintiff’s motion is thirty-three (33) pages long and, as a result, is in violation of Local

24

Rule 7-3. See LR 7-3 (setting a thirty-page limit on motions for summary judgment and a twenty-

25

four-page limit on all other motions). Accordingly, the court will strike the noncompliant

26

document. LR IC 7-1 (“The court may strike documents that do not comply with these rules.”).

27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

(ECF No. 88).

However, plaintiff’s motion contains no supporting

Moreover, to the extent that the court may construe either of plaintiff’s motion as a motion
for reconsideration, plaintiff has provided no authority to support such a motion.

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS ORDERED THAT plaintiff’s “motion to request who has jurisdiction on fraud on

3
4
5

the court” (ECF No. 87) be, and the same hereby is, STRICKEN.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT plaintiff’s “motion to report alleged fraud and witness
tampering” (ECF No. 88) be, and the same hereby is, STRICKEN.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

DATED September 11, 2019.

8
9

__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-