Hurt v. Clinton et al

Filing 17

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 5/26/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 5/12/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 TYRONE HURT, 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 15 On March 2, 2017, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 16 Docket No. 5. The Court found Plaintiff’s complaint deficient because it was not sufficiently legible 17 to enable the Court or any opposing party to fully understand it. Id. at 1. The Court ordered that, 18 to the extent Plaintiff believed he could cure the identified defect, he must file an amended complaint 19 by April 3, 2017. Id. at 2. On March 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Docket No. 20 7. On March 17, 2017, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend, again because 21 it was illegible. Docket No. 8. at 1-2. The Court gave Plaintiff one final opportunity to cure the 22 identified defect and ordered him to file a second amended complaint, no later than April 17, 2017. 23 Id. The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with its order would result in the recommended 24 dismissal of this case, without prejudice. Id. at 2. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a second amended 25 complaint. See Docket. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be 10 Plaintiff(s), 11 vs. 12 HILLARY R. CLINTON, et al., 13 Defendant(s). 26 27 28 Case No. 2:17-cv-00315-JAD-NJK REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 1 DISMISSED without prejudice.1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: May 12, 2017. 4 NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 5 6 NOTICE 7 Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be 8 in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days. The Supreme Court has 9 held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file 10 objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also 11 held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and 12 brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order and/or appeal 13 factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 14 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 27 The Court notes that Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. Docket No. 14. No dispositive rulings have been issued in this case. Instead, Plaintiff appeals the Court’s order denying his motion for the Court to reconsider its order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. See id. Notwithstanding that notice of appeal, this Court retains jurisdiction over this case. See, e.g., Nascimento v. Dummer, 508 F.3d 905 (9th Cir.2007) (“when an improper appeal is taken, the district court retains its jurisdiction to act on the case”). 28 2 24 25 26

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?