Hamer v. State of Nevada Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation Employment and Training

Filing 38

ORDER that 27 Motion to Order the Issuance of Complaint and Summons, 29 Motion to Issue Complaint and Summons and for Modification of the Number of Defendants, and 33 Motion to Issue and Serve Summonses are denied. FURTHER ORDERED that 36 Motion to Update Current Status of Summons and Complaint is denied as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 7/10/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

CLARK HAMER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
STATE OF NEVADA BUREAU OF
)
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION
)
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING,
)
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)

15

Case No. 2:15-cv-01036-GMN-GWF
ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Order the Issuance of Complaint and

16

Summons (ECF No. 27), filed on January 30, 2017, Motion to Issue Complaint and Summons and

17

for Modification of the Number of Defendants (ECF No. 29), filed on April 7, 2017, and Motion to

18

Issue and Serve Summonses (ECF No. 33), filed on June 9, 2017. Also before the Court is

19

Plaintiff’s Motion to Update Current Status of Summons and Complaint (ECF No. 36), filed on

20

June 23, 2017.

21

On September 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed his “third” amended Complaint1. ECF No. 19. On

22

April 7, 2017, Plaintiff requested to modify the number of defendants and/or their capacities to be

23

charged but did not provide the names or entities of the defendants. See ECF No. 29. Plaintiff

24

listed twelve individuals in his third amended complaint and described them as employees of the

25

State of Nevada “that had a hand in directly depriving [him] of [his] privileges as a client and citizen

26

of the United States, while violating State and Federal regulations.” See Third Amended Complaint

27
28
1

Although it is his second amended complaint, Plaintiff titled it as his third amended complaint
and the Court will refer to it as the third amended complaint hereinafter.

1

(ECF No. 19), pg. 3. On May 24, 2017, the Court screened Plaintiff’s third amended complaint,

2

recommended that Plaintiff’s discrimination claim against the Nevada Disability and Advocacy Law

3

Center (“NDALC”) be dismissed, and ordered the Clerk of Court to issue summons to Defendant

4

Nevada Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation (“NBVR”). On June 9, 2017, Plaintiff requested that

5

the Court order the Clerk of Court to issue summons to ten individuals as defendants.

6

Although Plaintiff identified individuals in his third amended complaint, they were not

7

named as individual defendants or parties to this matter and the Court did not authorize Plaintiff to

8

file an amended complaint against them. The Court, therefore, denies Plaintiff’s request to serve

9

summonses against the individual defendants listed in his third amended complaint without

10

prejudice to Plaintiff filing a motion to amend with an attached proposed amended complaint

11

according to the Local Rules of Practice for the District of Nevada and the Federal Rules of Civil

12

Procedure. In his June 23, 2017 motion, Plaintiff appears to be updating the Court on the service of

13

his third amended complaint upon Defendant NBVR and does not request any specific form or

14

relief. Accordingly,

15

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Order the Issuance of Complaint and

16

Summons (ECF No. 27), Motion to Issue Complaint and Summons and for Modification of the

17

Number of Defendants (ECF No. 29), and Motion to Issue and Serve Summonses (ECF No. 33) are

18

denied.

19

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Motion to Update Current Status of Summons and

20

Complaint (ECF No. 36) is denied as moot.

21

DATED this 10th day of July, 2017.

22
23
24

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

25
26
27
28
2