Coulson v. Southern Nevada Movers

Filing 19

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 11 - 15 Motions. Plaintiff is advised that he should refrain from filing excessive and unnecessary motions on the docket. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 9/23/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
EDWARD COULSON,

15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

16

Plaintiff is proceeding in this case pro se and, on September 21, 2016, he filed six different

17

motions. This order resolves five of those motions: (a) motion for status hearing (Docket No. 11);

18

(b) motion to schedule a preliminary hearing (Docket No. 12); (c) motion to set a trial date (Docket

19

No. 13); (d) motion for a Rule 16 hearing (Docket No. 14); and (e) motion for appointment of pro

20

bono counsel (Docket No. 15).1 With respect to the three motions to set various hearings, the Court

21

finds a hearing not appropriate at this time. With respect to the motion to set a trial date, that motion

22

is premature because a trial date will be set (if the case survives the pleadings and dispositive

23

motions) once a joint pretrial order is submitted. See, e.g., Local Rule 16-4, Local Rule 26-1(b)(5).

24

With respect to the motion for appointment of pro bono counsel, the Court finds that appointment

11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
SOUTHERN NEVADA MOVERS,
14
Defendant(s).

Case No. 2:16-cv-01989-RFB-NJK
ORDER
(Docket Nos. 11-15)

25
26
27
28

1

In response to the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. Docket No. 8. This
notice of appeal does not divest the Court of jurisdiction to resolve the matters currently pending
here. See, e.g., Nascimento v. Dummer, 408 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir. 2007) (“when an improper
appeal is taken, the district court retains its jurisdiction to act on the case”).

1

of counsel is not appropriate in this case. Cf. Gen. Order 2014-01 (outlining standards for referral

2

to the Court’s pro bono pilot program). Accordingly, the motions at Docket Nos. 11-15 are

3

DENIED.

4

The Court recognizes that Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and may lack extensive experience

5

in civil litigation in federal court. As such, Plaintiff is advised that he should refrain from filing

6

excessive and unnecessary motions on the docket.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

Dated: September 23, 2016

9
10
11

NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-