Tagle v. State of Nevada et al
Filing
129
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 119 Plaintiff Victor Tagle's Motion to Opposition to Dismiss of Case is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 11/8/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
VICTOR TAGLE,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
Case No. 2:15-cv-02143-RFB-CWH
ORDER
12
13
Presently before the court is Plaintiff Victor Tagle’s Motion to Opposition to Dismiss of
14
Case (ECF No. 119), filed on October 19, 2017. Defendant Christopher Beecroft filed a response
15
(ECF No. 128) on November 3, 2017.
16
Plaintiff requests that the court deny Defendant’s forthcoming motion to dismiss, arguing
17
that the filing deadline has passed and that Defendant purposely has held the motion to dismiss to
18
delay the case. Defendant responds that the motion should be denied because it is not supported by
19
points and authorities and because the United States district judge assigned to this case ordered
20
Plaintiff to refrain from filing additional motions until the court issues a decision on Defendant’s
21
forthcoming motion to dismiss, unless the motion concerns a health or safety issue.
22
The court extended Defendant’s deadline for filing a motion to dismiss to November 13,
23
2017. (Order (ECF No. 126).) Thus, the court denies Plaintiff’s motion to the extent he requests
24
that the forthcoming motion to dismiss be denied on the grounds that it is untimely. Additionally,
25
Plaintiff was ordered to refrain from filing motions until the court rules on the forthcoming motion
26
to dismiss, unless it concerns his health or safety. (Order (ECF No. 110).) This motion does not
27
concern Plaintiff’s health or safety and therefore should not have been filed. Plaintiff is advised
28
that future failures to comply with the court’s order may result in the imposition of sanctions under
1
2
3
Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and/or Local Rule IA 11-8.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Victor Tagle’s Motion to Opposition to
Dismiss of Case (ECF No. 119) is DENIED.
4
5
DATED: November 8, 2017
6
7
8
______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?