Tagle v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 96

ORDER denying 93 Plaintiff's Motion for Removal from NDOC's Facilities, Due to the Obvious Danger, Court's and Authorities Intervention, due to D.A.G's Hardcastle, et al., Harassment, and Professional Misconduct, Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 6/26/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
VICTOR TAGLE, SR.,

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

3:16-cv-00148-MMD-WGC
MINUTES OF THE COURT
June 26, 2017

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:

KATIE OGDEN

REPORTER: NONE APPEARING

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
Before the court is Plaintiff’s “Request for Removal from NDOC’s Facilities, Due to the
Obvious Danger, Court’s and Authorities Intervention, due to D.A.G’s Hardcastle, et al.,
Harassment, and Profesional (sic) Misconduct, Sanctions to the Defenders” (ECF No. 93). Plaintiff
claims Clark Leslie tried to “murder me, through NDOC’s personnel, and tamper with evidence,
mail, et al.,” “Hardcastle promises ‘retaliation’ and more, if I don’t stop suing them,” and various
other things. (Id.) Plaintiff’s motion was (again) filed improperly in all of Plaintiff’s cases. (See,
ECF No. 91 at 3.)
Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 93) objects to and complains of the alleged actions of individuals
who are not parties to this case. In fact, Plaintiff’s request does not even mention the named
Defendant against whom Plaintiff’s complaint of alleged excessive force arising at Ely State Prison
was allowed to proceed. (ECF No. 6.) In any event, Plaintiff’s motion does not request any specific
relief from the court, let alone provide factual or evidentiary support or legal authority for his
motion.
Plaintiff’s “Request for Removal from NDOC’s Facilities, Due to the Obvious Danger,
Court’s and Authorities Intervention, due to D.A.G’s Hardcastle, et al., Harassment, and Profesional
(sic) Misconduct, Sanctions to the Defenders” (ECF No. 93) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DEBRA K. KEMPI, CLERK
By:
/s/
Deputy Clerk