Wright v. Frayn et al

Filing 13

ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Brian Wright's motion for a status check ECF No. 10 is GRANTED. IT IS RECOMMENDED that ECF Nos. 11 Motion for Summary Judgment and 12 Motion for Default Judgment be DENIED without prejudice. Objections to R&R due by 8/23/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 8/9/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

BRIAN WRIGHT,

7
8
9

Case No. 2:17-cv-01844-MMD-CWH
Plaintiff,
ORDER AND
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

v.
KIMBERLY FRAYN, et al.,

10

Defendants.

11
12

Presently before the court is pro se plaintiff Brian Wright’s motion for a status check

13

(ECF No. 10), filed on December 14, 2017, in which Mr. Wright requests the status of his case.

14

Also before the court are Mr. Wright’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) and motion

15

for default judgment (ECF No. 12).

16

Mr. Wright’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 9), which was filed on

17

September 11, 2017, is awaiting decision by the court. At the time the court addresses the

18

application to proceed in forma pauperis, it also must screen the complaint (ECF No. 1-1). The

19

court addresses all applications to proceed in forma pauperis in the order they are filed. While

20

the court strives to resolve all matters as expeditiously as possible, given the court’s current

21

caseload, as well as the fact that all criminal matters must be addressed before all civil matters as

22

liberty interests are at stake, the screening process is lengthy. The court will address Mr.

23

Wright’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and screen his complaint in due course. Given

24

that his complaint has not yet been screened and service has not been ordered, Mr. Wright’s

25

motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) and motion for default judgment (ECF No. 12) are

26

premature. The court therefore will recommend that they be denied without prejudice on that

27

basis. Accordingly,

28

1
2
3

IT IS ORDERED that Brian Wright’s motion for a status check (ECF No. 10) is
GRANTED as stated in this order.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that Brian Wright’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No.

4

11) and motion for default judgment (ECF No. 12) be DENIED without prejudice on the grounds

5

they are premature.
NOTICE

6
7

This report and recommendation is submitted to the United States district judge assigned

8

to this case under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party who objects to this report and recommendation

9

may file a written objection supported by points and authorities within fourteen days of being

10

served with this report and recommendation. Local Rule IB 3-2(a). Failure to file a timely

11

objection may waive the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d

12

1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).

13
14

DATED: August 9, 2018

15
16
17

C.W. HOFFMAN, JR.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2