Campbell, Sr. v. District Attorney of Clark County et al
Filing
13
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff Nathan Campbell Sr.'s case be DISMISSED without prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 5/18/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 5/4/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5
6
NATHAN CAMPBELL,
7
Plaintiff,
8
vs.
9
10
11
DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF CLARK
COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
2:15-cv-01893-RFB-CWH
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
12
13
On March 30, 2017, the court entered an order denying Plaintiff Nathan Campbell Sr.’s
14
application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice. (Order (ECF No. 12).) The order
15
required Plaintiff to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis or to pay the $400.00
16
fee for filing a civil action by May 1, 2017. (Id. at 6.) The court advised Plaintiff that failure to
17
comply with its order may result in a recommendation that his case be dismissed. (Id.) Plaintiff has
18
not taken any action in this case since the court’s order dated March 30, 2017, and he therefore
19
appears to have abandoned this case.
20
21
22
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff Nathan Campbell Sr.’s case be
DISMISSED without prejudice.
NOTICE
23
This report and recommendation is submitted to the United States district judge assigned to
24
this case under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party who objects to this report and recommendation may
25
file a written objection supported by points and authorities within fourteen days of being served with
26
this report and recommendation. Local Rule IB 3-2(a). Failure to file a timely objection may waive
1
the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).
2
3
DATED: May 4, 2017
4
5
6
_________________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
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?