Choate et al v. Nevada Division Mortgage Lending et al

Filing 9

ORDER Denying as moot Plaintiff's 8 Motion to Amend Complaint. Deadline for Plaintiffs to file Amended Complaint: 4/6/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 3/6/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 2 *** 3 4 STEPHEN CHOATE, et rel. BARBARA PURNELL, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Case No. 2:17-cv-03094-RFB-VCF ORDER Plaintiffs, vs. MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 8] NEVADA DIVISION MORTGAGE LENDING, et al., Defendants. Before the Court is Plaintiffs Stephen Choate and Barbara Purnell’s Motion to Amend Complaint. (ECF No. 8). For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ motion is denied as moot. On February 13, 2018, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiffs’ in forma pauperis application 12 and dismissing their complaint without prejudice. (ECF No. 6). The Court stated: 13 16 Plaintiffs must file an amended complaint (1) explaining how their action is not barred by the § 1983 statute of limitations and time limit in NRS 233B.130(2)(d) and (2) clarifying or removing the double jeopardy claim. The amended complaint must be “complete in itself, including exhibits, without reference to the superseded pleading.” LR 15-1. 17 (Id. at 3). On March 5, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend the complaint, attempting to address the 18 Court’s concerns. (ECF No. 8). 14 15 19 20 21 The Court has already directed Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint, so Plaintiffs’ motion to amend (ECF No. 8) is moot. The Court finds that allowing Plaintiffs to address issues outside of a complete amended complaint will needlessly complicate the Court’s evaluation of Plaintiffs’ case. 22 Plaintiffs must state their claims within an amended complaint, not a motion. The Court will not address 23 any new factual assertions or claims raised by Plaintiffs except in an amended complaint that is “complete 24 25 in itself, including exhibits, without reference to the superseded pleading.’” (ECF No. 6 at 3). 1 In addition, “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by…a party 1 2 personally if the party is unrepresented.” Plaintiffs’ motion was only signed by Choate. (ECF No. 8). 3 Though the Court did not address it in the previous screening order, the complaint was also only signed 4 by Choate. (ECF No. 7). Moving forward, all pleadings, motions, and other papers submitted by 5 Plaintiffs, including the amended complaint, must be signed by both Plaintiffs. 6 Accordingly, and for good cause shown, 7 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ for Motion to Amend Complaint (ECF No. 8) is DENIED as 8 9 10 moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for Plaintiffs to file their amended complaint will be extended to April 6, 2018. Plaintiffs are cautioned that the Court will not be inclined to move the 11 deadline again should Plaintiffs respond with other motions rather than an amended complaint. 12 NOTICE 13 14 Under Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Order must be in writing and filed with the Clerk 15 of the Court within 14 days. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an 16 appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. (See Thomas v. Arn, 17 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985)). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified 18 time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the 19 District Court’s order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. (See Martinez v. 20 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th 21 Cir. 1983)). 22 23 24 25 2 Pursuant to LSR 2-2, the Plaintiffs must immediately file written notification with the court of any 1 2 3 change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon each opposing party or the party’s attorney. Failure to comply with this Rule may result in dismissal of the action. (See LSR 2-2). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 DATED this 6th day of March, 2018. 6 _________________________ 7 CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3

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?