Tingley v. Nevada Department of Corrections et al

Filing 4

ORDER denying 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying as moot Motion for Appointment of Counsel 1 -2; and denying 3 Motion to Name John Doe or Add Defendant. Clerk shall close case and enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 3/25/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7

ADAM WYNN TINGLEY,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS et al.,

11
Defendants.
12

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:14-cv-577-RCJ-VPC
ORDER

___________________________________
13
I.

DISCUSSION

14
Plaintiff, who is a prisoner in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections
15
(“NDOC”), has submitted a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and has filed
16
an application to proceed in forma pauperis, a motion for appointment of counsel, and a
17
motion to name John Doe or add defendant to complaint. (ECF No. 1, 1-1, 1-2, 3).
18
The Court notes that Plaintiff is attempting to add a defendant to the facts alleged in
19
Tingley v. NDOC, 3:14-cv-358-MMD-VPC. In the present case, Plaintiff directs this Court to
20
refer to the other case for background, then briefly alleges the same facts, and then attempts
21
to state a claim against Defendant Dr. Arana. (ECF No. 1-1 at 3-4). The Court notes that in
22
the earlier case, the Honorable Miranda M. Du dismissed Dr. Arana from that case, without
23
prejudice, because there were no allegations against him in the complaint. (See CM/ECF
24
#3:14-cv-358-MMD-VPC No. 4 at 5). The Court closes this case and directs Plaintiff to file a
25
motion for leave to file an amended complaint in case 3:14-cv-358-MMD-VPC because
26
Plaintiff is merely attempting to add a defendant to that case. As such, the Court denies the
27
application to proceed in forma pauperis and the motion for appointment of counsel as moot.
28

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

II.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma

pauperis (ECF No. 1) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 1-2)
is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to name John Doe or add defendant to
complaint (ECF No. 3) is denied.

8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a motion to name John Doe or add

9

defendant to the complaint in his other open case, Tingley v. NDOC, 3:14-cv-358-MMD-VPC.

10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall close this case and enter

11

judgment accordingly.

12
13
14

Dated: This 25th day of March, 2015.
DATED: This _____ day of March, 2015.

15
16

_________________________________
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2