Plank v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al

Filing 61

ORDER. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 8/10/2016. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 8/4/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DL)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

DAVID EDWIN PLANK,

8
9
10
11

Case No. 2:12-CV-2205 JCM (PAL)
Plaintiff(s),

ORDER

v.
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al.
Defendant(s).

12
13
14

Presently before the court is the matter of Plank v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department, et al., case number 2:12-cv-02205-JCM (PAL).

15

On May 14, 2016, the court granted in part and denied in part defendant Las Vegas

16

Metropolitan police department’s motion for summary judgment. (See ECF No. 50). Thereafter,

17

Magistrate Judge Leen granted a stipulation extending the deadline for filing of the parties’ joint

18

pretrial order to July 13, 2016. On that date, plaintiff Edward Plank’s counsel filed the proposed

19

order. (ECF No. 57). The joint order, however, did not comply with Local Rule (“LR”) 16-3(b)(9),

20

and the court entered a minute order instructing the attorney to refile a compliant version of the

21

proposed order. (See ECF No. 58).

22

Plaintiff’s counsel filed a new proposed order on July 15, 2016. (ECF No. 59). Once again,

23

the order violated LR 16-3(b)(9). The court again instructed plaintiff’s counsel to refile a compliant

24

order on July 20, 2016. (ECF No. 60).

25

As of the date of this order, it has been over two weeks since the court’s last minute order

26

and over three weeks since the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order. No proposed joint pretrial

27

order that complies with the local rules has been filed. The parties are ordered to file a fully

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

compliant joint pretrial order within five (5) days of entry of this order or show cause for why they

2

cannot do so. Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of this matter.

3

Accordingly,

4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the parties shall file a

5

proposed joint pretrial order that complies fully with the local rules within five (5) days of entry

6

of this order or show cause for why they cannot do so.

7
8
9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that failure to comply with this order may result in
dispositive sanctions.
DATED August 4, 2016.

10
11
12

__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

-2-