Hubbard et al v. Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority et al

Filing 4

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. IT IS RECOMMENDED that 3 Plaintiffs Kenneth Hubbard and Barbara Fletcher's Complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court be instructed to close the case and enter judgment accordingly. Objections to R&R due by 6/1/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 5/18/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7
8

KENNETH HUBBARD and BARBARA
FLETCHER,

9
10
11

v.

Case No. 2:16-cv-01015-GMN-PAL

Plaintiffs,

REPORT OF FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION

SOUTHERN NEVADA REGIONAL
HOUSING AUTHORITY, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs Kenneth Hubbard and Barbara Fletcher’s

14

failure to comply with the court’s Screening Order (ECF No. 2). This matter is referred to the

15

undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and LR IB 1-4 of the Local Rules of Practice.

16

Plaintiff are proceeding in this action pro se, that is, representing themselves. They

17

submitted an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 1) and proposed complaint

18

(ECF No. 1-1). The court issued a Screening Order (ECF No. 2) granting Plaintiffs permission to

19

proceed in forma pauperis and screening the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The

20

undersigned found that the complaint failed to state a valid claim and allowed them until May 10,

21

2017, to file an amended complaint. The Screening Order warned Plaintiffs that a failure to file

22

an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies explained by the court would result in a

23

recommendation to the district judge that this case be dismissed. To date, Plaintiffs have not filed

24

an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or taken any other action to prosecute this

25

case.

26

Accordingly,

27

///

28

///
1

1

IT IS RECOMMENDED:

2

1. Plaintiffs Kenneth Hubbard and Barbara Fletcher’s Complaint (ECF No. 3) be

3

DISMISSED without prejudice.

4

2. The Clerk of the Court be instructed to close the case and enter judgment accordingly.

5

Dated this 18th day of May, 2017.

6
7

PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8

NOTICE

9
10

This Report of Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the assigned district judge

11

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is not immediately appealable to the Court of Appeals for

12

the Ninth Circuit. Any notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit should not be filed until entry of the

13

district court’s judgment. See Fed. R. App. Pro. 4(a)(1). Pursuant to LR IB 3-2(a) of the Local

14

Rules of Practice, any party wishing to object to a magistrate judge’s findings and

15

recommendations of shall file and serve specific written objections, together with points and

16

authorities in support of those objections, within 14 days of the date of service. See also 28 U.S.C.

17

§ 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 6, 72. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

18

Judge’s Report of Findings and Recommendation,” and it is subject to the page limitations found

19

in LR 7-3(b). The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may

20

result in the district court’s acceptance of this Report of Findings and Recommendation without

21

further review. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). In addition,

22

failure to file timely objections to any factual determinations by a magistrate judge may be

23

considered a waiver of a party’s right to appellate review of the findings of fact in an order or

24

judgment entered pursuant to the recommendation. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156 (9th

25

Cir. 1991); Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 72.

26
27
28
2