Smith Jr. v. State of Nevada

Filing 8

ORDER adopting 7 Report and Recommendation in full. This case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Cristina D. Silva on 5/10/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 2 3 4 Melvin David Smith, Jr., Plaintiff 5 v. 6 Case No. 2:23-cv-01465-CDS-NJK Order Adopting Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and Closing Case 7 State of Nevada, [ECF No. 7] Defendant 8 9 Plaintiff Melvin Smith, Jr., initiated this action while detained at Clark County 10 11 Detention Center (CCDC), without submitting an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) or 12 paying the filing fee required to bring a civil action. See Compl., ECF No. 1. Magistrate Judge 13 Nancy Koppe ordered Smith, Jr. to either pay the filing fee or file an IFP application no later than 14 May 7, 2024, but the order was returned as undeliverable. Order, ECF No. 3; Notice, ECF No. 4. 15 Then, Judge Koppe ordered Smith, Jr. to update his address no later than April 22, 2024, but the 16 order was also returned as undeliverable. Order, ECF No. 5; Notice, ECF No. 6. Judge Koppe 17 recommends that this case be dismissed. R&R, ECF No. 7. 18 I. Discussion 19 Smith, Jr. had until May 8, 2024 to file any objections to the R&R. LR IB 3-2(a) (stating 20 that parties wishing to object to an R&R must file objections within fourteen days); see also 28 21 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To date, no objections have been filed and the deadline to do so has passed. 1 22 The Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate 23 judge’s R&R where no objections have been filed. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 24 (9th Cir. 2003). I nonetheless reviewed Judge Koppe’s previous orders, the R&R, and the docket 25 26 The R&R has not yet been returned as undeliverable, but it is unlikely Smith, Jr. received it because he has not provided the court his current address. 1 1 in this matter, and find that dismissal is prudent as Smith, Jr. has failed to comply with Judge 2 Koppe’s orders. 3 Smith, Jr. filed his “ex parte motion” in September of 2023 while at CCDC. ECF No. 1. 4 Seemingly by March 2024, Smith, Jr. had been released from CCDC because orders mailed to him 5 at CCDC have been returned as undeliverable. See Notice, ECF Nos. 4; 6. But Smith, Jr. failed to 6 immediately file a written notification of any change of mailing address as required by Local Rule 7 IA 3-1. And “[f]ailure to comply with [Local Rule IA 3-1] may result in the dismissal of the action, 8 entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the court.” LR IA 3-1. 9 Further, it is well established that district courts have the authority to dismiss an action based on 10 a party’s failure to prosecute, failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. 11 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for 12 noncompliance with local rule); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) 13 (dismissal for failure to comply with court order). 14 Here, dismissal is warranted because Smith, Jr. not only failed to comply with Judge 15 Koppe’s orders, but he also failed to comply with Local Rule IA 3-1. Thus, I adopt the R&R in its 16 entirety and dismiss this action. 17 II. Conclusion 18 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 7] is 19 adopted in full. This case is dismissed without prejudice. 20 The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to close this case. 21 Dated: May 10, 2024 22 23 24 Cristina D. Silva United States District Judge 25 26 2

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?