Hatlen v. Cox et al

Filing 11

ORDER denying as moot 10 motion for information or correction. Plaintiff shall comply with the Court's 8/13/2014 and 9/2/2014 orders. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 9/9/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
GREG COX et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
___________________________________ )

13

I.

7
8
9
10
11

KENNETH W. HATLEN,

3:14-cv-316-RCJ-WGC
ORDER

DISCUSSION

14

On August 13, 2014, U.S. Magistrate Judge William Cobb entered a screening order

15

dismissing the complaint in its entirety for failure to state a claim without prejudice with leave

16

to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 6 at 7). Judge Cobb granted Plaintiff 30 days to file

17

an amended complaint and then granted a subsequent extension of time to file the amended

18

complaint. (ECF No. 6 at 7; ECF No. 9).

19

On September 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for more information or correction. (ECF

20

No. 10). Plaintiff states that he just learned that only a federal district judge can “screen” a civil

21

rights complaint and that his civil rights complaint had been screened by a federal magistrate

22

judge. (Id. at 1). Plaintiff seeks a screening order by a federal district judge. (Id.).

23

Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) provides:

24

(A) a judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine any pretrial
matter pending before the court, except a motion for injunctive relief, for
judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss or quash an
indictment or information made by the defendant, to suppress evidence in a
criminal case, to dismiss or to permit maintenance of a class action, to dismiss
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and to involuntarily
dismiss an action. A judge of the court may reconsider any pretrial matter under
this subparagraph (A) where it has been shown that the magistrate judge’s order
is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

25
26
27
28

(B) a judge may also designate a magistrate judge to conduct hearings,

3

including evidentiary hearings, and to submit to a judge of the court proposed
findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition, by a judge of the court,
of any motion excepted in subparagraph (A), of applications for posttrial relief
made by individuals convicted of criminal offenses and of prisoner petitions
challenging conditions of confinement.

4

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A)-(B). Nevada Local Rules IB 1-3 and 1-4 are consistent with this

5

provision. See Nev. Loc. R. IB 1-3 (stating that a “magistrate judge may hear and finally

6

determine any pretrial matter not specifically enumerated as an exception in 28 U.S.C. §

7

636(b)(1)(A)”).

1
2

8

In this case, the magistrate judge entered an order of dismissal without prejudice and

9

with leave to file an amended complaint, which is in the magistrate judge’s purview under 28

10

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If Plaintiff fails to amend his complaint, or should he fail to state a claim

11

upon which relief may be granted in his amended complaint, the magistrate judge will prepare

12

a report and recommendation for dismissal of the action with prejudice for the assigned district

13

judge’s review. Alternatively, the district judge may issue the orders directly himself.

14

II.

15
16
17
18

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for information or correction

(ECF No. 10) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall comply with the Court’s August 13, 2014
and September 2, 2014 orders.

19
20

9th
DATED: This _____ day of September, 2014.

21
22

_________________________________
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
2