Depasquale v. State of Nevada, ex rel. NDOC et al
Filing
14
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the clerk shall electronically serve defendants with a copy of this order and the 13 amended complaint. (Electronically served defendants via CM/ECF, see this NEF and #13 NEF for regenerated service of complaint.) The AG shall advise the court w/in twenty-one (21) days from the date that this order is entered whether service of process for the named defendant(s) is accepted. Defendant(s) that which are accepted shall file and serve an answer or other respo nse to the complaint within thirty (30) days of the notice of acceptance of service. If service cannot be accepted for any of the defendant(s), then plaintiff will need to file a motion identifying the unserved defendants, requesting the issuance of a summons. FURTHER ORDERED, plaintiff is provided filing instructions and requirements for this action, see Order for details. FURTHER ORDERED, plaintiff's 10 objections, which the court construes as a motion for reconsideration, are DENIED. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 8/25/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KO)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
VINCENT DEPASQUALE,
10
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
Case No. 3:11-CV-00191-LRH-(RAM)
STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
13
ORDER
Defendants.
14
15
Plaintiff has submitted an amended complaint (#13). The amended complaint cures the
16
defects that the court found in the original complaint (#8). The court will serve the amended
17
complaint (#13) upon defendants for a response.
18
Plaintiff also has submitted objections (#10) to the court’s order (#7) that denied his motion
19
for appointment of counsel (#3). The court construes the objections (#10) as a motion for
20
reconsideration. Nothing in the objections (#10) causes the court to depart from its earlier
21
conclusions.
22
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the clerk of the court shall electronically serve
23
defendants with a copy of this order and the amended complaint (#13). The Attorney General shall
24
advise the court within twenty-one (21) days from the date that this order is entered whether service
25
of process for the named defendants is accepted. If the Attorney General accepts service of process
26
for any of the defendants, such defendant(s) shall file and serve an answer or other response to the
27
complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of the notice of acceptance of service. If service cannot
28
be accepted for any of the named defendants, then plaintiff will need to file a motion identifying the
1
unserved defendant(s), requesting the issuance of a summons, and specifying a full name and
2
address for said defendant(s). Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
3
service must be accomplished within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date that this order is
4
entered.
5
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that henceforth, plaintiff shall serve upon defendants or, if
6
appearance has been entered by counsel, upon the attorney(s), a copy of every pleading, motion or
7
other document submitted for consideration by the court. Plaintiff shall include with the original
8
paper submitted for filing a certificate stating the date that a true and correct copy of the document
9
was mailed to the defendants or counsel for the defendants. The court may disregard any paper
10
received by a district judge or magistrate judge which has not been filed with the clerk, and any
11
paper received by a district judge, magistrate judge or the clerk which fails to include a certificate of
12
service.
13
14
15
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s objections (#10), which the court construes as a
motion for reconsideration, are DENIED.
DATED this 25th day of August, 2011.
16
17
_________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-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?