Yates v. Naphcare, Inc. et al

Filing 31

ORDER that 30 Plaintiff's Emergency Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 29 Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot. IT IS FURTHER OR DERED that defendants shall have 21 days from the date on which this order is entered to file and serve an answer or other response to the complaint. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/7/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9

GABRIEL YATES,

10

Plaintiff,

11

vs.

12

NAPHCARE, et al.,

13

Case No. 2:12-cv-01865-JCM-VCF

Defendants.

ORDER

14
15

Plaintiff has submitted a second amended complaint (#28). The court has reviewed it

16

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff has corrected the defects that the court has found in the

17

first amended complaint. Defendants will need to respond.

18

Also before the court is plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (#29). The

19

application is moot because defendants have removed the action to this court and have paid the

20

filing fee.

21

Plaintiff has submitted an emergency ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order

22

(#30). Defendants have already appeared in this action. Plaintiff has not explained why he filed the

23

motion ex parte, thus ensuring that defendants will not receive a notice of electronic filing,

24

particularly when the defendants already have appeared in this action. The court will deny the

25

motion without prejudice to plaintiff filing the notice correctly.

26
27
28

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s emergency ex parte motion for a temporary
restraining order (#30) is DENIED without prejudice.

1
2
3
4
5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (#29)
is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants shall have twenty-one (21) days from the date
on which this order is entered to file and serve an answer or other response to the complaint.
DATED: February 7, 2014.

6
7

_________________________________
JAMES C. MAHAN
United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-