Tagle v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 108

ORDER that ECF Nos. 106 / 107 Response, filed by Victor Tagle are STRICKEN from the docket. Plaintiff is cautioned that any future filings which contain any impertinent or scandalous language could lead to the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of Plaintiff's action by the U.S. District Court. LR IA 11-8(d). Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 07/25/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
VICTOR TAGLE, SR.,
9
10
11
12
13

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________________)

3:16-cv-00148-MMD-WGC
ORDER

14
Before the court is Plaintiff’s “Response to Defendant’s Ridiculos (sic), Repetitive, Lack of
15
Sense, Obscene, Pre-Arranged with Judge Phonny (sic) Motions” (ECF No. 106) which Plaintiff filed
16
on July 21, 2017, via the court’s CM/ECF system. A duplicate of ECF No. 106 was filed this date as
17
ECF No. 107. Plaintiff’s filings (ECF Nos. 106, 107) were ostensibly submitted in opposition to
18
Defendant Rowley’s motion for extension of time to file a dispositive motion. (ECF No. 103, July 19,
19
2017), which extension was granted by the court and served electronically upon Plaintiff on July 20,
20

2017. (ECF No. 105.)1

21
The Plaintiff’s two filings (ECF Nos. 106, 107) are nothing more than an unsupported diatribe
22
against the Honorable Cam Ferenbach, U.S. Magistrate Judge, and a derogatory, salacious and lascivious
23
assault on the character of Deputy Attorney General Hardcastle.
24
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)(1) permits the court, on its own motion, to strike any “impertinent or
25
scandalous matter.” Assertions are “impertinent” if they are not responsive to the issues that arise in the
26
27
1

28

The court’s docket reflects its July 20, 2017, order was served on Plaintiff via the Lovelock
Correctional Center Librarian at 10:25 a.m. on that same date. Thus, the court’s order was entered well before
Plaintiff’s first response (ECF No. 106) which was filed at 2:19 p.m. on the day following the court’s order.
(NEF, ECF No. 106.)

1

action; a “scandalous” matter is “that which casts a cruely derogatory light on a party or other person.”

2

Righthaven LLC v. Democratic Underground ,LLC, 791 F.Supp.2d 968, 977 (D. Nev. 2011, Hunt, Chief

3

District Judge), citing In re 2TheMart.com, Inc. Sec. Litig., 114 F.Supp.2d 955, 965 (C.D. Cal. 2000).

4

Allegations will be stricken under Rule 12(f) if they contain “repulsive language or detract from the

5

dignity of the court.” Sierra Club v. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Ass’n, Inc., 173 F.R.D. 275,

6

285 (D. Colo. 1997).

7
8

The court finds Plaintiff’s filings contain extensive impertinent and scandalous language. In
accordance with Rule 12(f)(1), ECF Nos. 106, 107 are STRICKEN from the docket.

9

Plaintiff is cautioned that any future filings which contain any impertinent or scandalous

10

language could lead to the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of Plaintiff’s action by the

11

U.S. District Court. LR IA 11-8(d).

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

DATED: July 25, 2017.

14
____________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2