Mark Elliott v. Oakridge Industries, Inc., et al
ORDER Declining to adopt 44 the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are referred to the Magistrate Judge to discuss moving the proceedings along in this case. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 4/5/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:15-cv-01143-APG-VCF
OAKRIDGE INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.,
ORDER ON REPORT AND
(ECF No. 44)
On August 19, 2016, Magistrate Judge Ferenbach recommended I dismiss the complaint
in this action with prejudice due to the plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders and his
disruptive litigation conduct. ECF No. 44. Plaintiff Mark Elliott objected. ECF Nos. 46, 52.
Although I appreciate the frustration with Elliott’s conduct while he was acting pro se, he
since has obtained counsel to represent him in this action. See ECF Nos. 58, 61, 62, 63. In light
of the policy preference for deciding cases on their merits, I decline to dismiss this action with
prejudice at this time. However, I advise Elliott and his counsel that future failures to obey court
orders or obstructive litigation tactics may result in sanctions up to and including dismissal with
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that I decline to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s report and
recommendation (ECF No. 44) and I do not dismiss this action with prejudice at this time.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are referred to the Magistrate Judge to
discuss moving the proceedings along in this case.
DATED this 5th day of April, 2017.
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?