Sanders v. Esurance Ins. Servs., Inc.

Full title: LARRY SANDERS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ESURANCE INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Jun 27, 2013

2:13-cv-00652-JCM-CWH (D. Nev. Jun. 27, 2013)

Opinion

2:13-cv-00652-JCM-CWH

06-27-2013

LARRY SANDERS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ESURANCE INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., et al., Defendants.

C.W. Hoffman, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On April 29, 2013, the Court entered an order denying Plaintiffs' motion to proceed in forma pauperis for failure to submit a complete application. See Order (#3). The motion was denied without prejudice and Plaintiffs instructed to file a completed application by May 24, 2013. Id. Thereafter, Plaintiffs filed a number of exhibits (#4) and a renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See Pls' Mot. (#5). In the renewed motion (#5), indicated their belief that they are not required to submit an in forma pauperis application because they are not incarcerated. The Court, again, denied the motion without prejudice and gave Plaintiffs additional time, until May 31, 2013, to file a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. See Order (#6). In both prior order (#3) and prior order (#6), Plaintiffs were warned that failure to comply with the Court's instruction may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Plaintiffs have not complied with the Court's orders or instruction.

Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing therefore,

RECOMMENDATION

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this matter be dismissed without prejudice and the case closed.

NOTICE

Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Finding and Recommendation must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

DATED: June 27, 2013.

/s/ _________

C.W. Hoffman, Jr.

United States Magistrate Judge