Dillard v. Lovell et al

Filing 7

ORDER. To date, the Court has not received an amended complaint or any request to extend the deadline for filing one. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail this recommendation to Plaintiff. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 2/5/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF cc Recommendation mailed to Plaintiff - CAH)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4
5
6
7
8
9

***
James H. Dillard II,

Case No. 2:23-cv-01242-CDS-DJA
Plaintiff,

Order

v.
Damon Lovell, Marquis Edwards, and Kenneth
Rucker,

10

Defendants.

11
12

The Court previously granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis and

13

screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 3). In doing so, the Court found

14

that Plaintiff’s complaint was deficient. (Id.). As a result, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s

15

complaint on October 27, 2023 and granted Plaintiff leave to amend the complaint, requiring that

16

an amended complaint be filed within 30 days, which has since passed. (Id.). The Court stated,

17

“[f]ailure to comply with this order will result in the recommended dismissal of this case.” (Id. at

18

4). To date, the Court has not received an amended complaint or any request to extend the

19

deadline for filing one.

20
21
22
23

Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without
prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail this recommendation to Plaintiff.
NOTICE
Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2 any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be

24

in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within (14) days after service of this Notice. The

25

Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived

26

due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142

27

(1985), reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986). The Ninth Circuit has also held that (1) failure to file

28

objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable

1

issues waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order and/or appeal factual issues from the

2

order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi

3

Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

4

DATED: February 5, 2024

5
6
7
8

DANIEL J. ALBREGTS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2