Santeler v. Navarro
ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1 Plaintiff's Notice and Demand by Declaration is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff has until 6/1/17 to file a complaint with an accompanying filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 5/1/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
RANDALL KEVIN SANTELER,
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Notice and Demand by Declaration (ECF No. 1).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3 governs commencing an action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 3. “A civil
action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court.” Id. A complaint must contain the following:
(1) a statement of the grounds for jurisdiction, (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing why
the Plaintiff is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), a filing fee is required to commence a civil action in federal court.
Here, Plaintiff has not complied with Rule 3 and 8. No complaint commencing this action has
been filed. The filing fee has not been paid. Plaintiff must pay the full filing fee for each case that he
seeks to open or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Notice and Demand by Declaration (ECF No. 1) is
DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff has until June 1, 2017 to file a complaint with an
accompanying filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Failure to comply with this order
may result in dismissal of this case.
Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and
recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in writing and filed with the Clerk
of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal
may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified
time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections
within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the
right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court.
Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452,
454 (9th Cir. 1983).
DATED this 1st day of May, 2017.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?