Smith v. Las Vegas Metro Police Department et al

Filing 57

ORDER that 46 Motion for Time Extension is DENIED as moot. FURTHER ORDERED that 48 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED as moot. FURTHER ORDERED that 49 Motion for Court Order for Exhibits is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 10/18/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

PHILLIP E. SMITH,

8
9
10
11

Plaintiff,

14

ORDER

v.
LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

Case No. 2:15-CV-01011-JCM-PAL

Presently before the court is the matter of Smith v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department et al, case no. 2:15-cv-01011-JCM-PAL.

15

On March 1, 2017, plaintiff Phillip E. Smith filed a motion for 30-day time extension for

16

interrogatories and production of documents, (ECF No. 46), a motion for appointment of counsel

17

for his appeal to the Ninth Circuit (ECF No. 48), and a motion for court order for exhibits for his

18

appeal to the Ninth Circuit (ECF No. 49).

19

Also on March 1, 2017, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal as to the clerk’s judgment. (ECF

20

No. 47.) On March 7, 2017, the Ninth Circuit referred the case to this court for a determination

21

of whether plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status should continue on appeal or whether the appeal is

22

frivolous or taken in bad faith. (ECF No. 51.) On March 22, 2017, this court ordered that

23

plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status be revoked. (ECF No. 52.)

24

On October 5, 2017, the Ninth Circuit dismissed plaintiff’s appeal as frivolous. (ECF

25

No. 53). Plaintiff’s motions regarding appointment of counsel and court order of exhibits are

26

therefore moot. Further, plaintiff’s motion for time extension, which requested an extension

27

through April 6, 2017, to conduct interrogatories and request documents, is moot. The court will

28

therefore deny plaintiff’s motions.

1

Accordingly,

2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for time extension (ECF No. 46) be,

3
4
5
6
7
8

and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF
No. 48) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for court order for exhibits (ECF No.
49) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot.
DATED THIS 18th day of October, 2017.

9
10

JAMES C. MAHAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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