From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanders v. Mingo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Sep 6, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cv-01398-PMP-GWF (D. Nev. Sep. 6, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:11-cv-01398-PMP-GWF

09-06-2012

TIMOTHY SANDERS, Plaintiff, v. MS. MINGO, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On December 9, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and ordered Plaintiff to file a motion identifying Defendant Mingo for the purpose of service. See Order (#7). Defendant Mingo is the only Defendant that survived screening. Plaintiff then file another Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (#9) on December 28, 2011. Plaintiff was already granted in forma pauperis status, and therefore Plaintiff's second Application (#9) is moot. Further, over eight months has passed and Plaintiff has failed to file a motion with the Court identifying Defendant Mingo for the purpose of service. The Court will therefore recommend Plaintiff's Complaint (#8) be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with the Court's Order (#7) and failure to prosecute this matter. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (#9) is denied as moot.

RECOMMENDATION

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Complaint (#8) be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with the Court's Order (#7) and failure to prosecute this matter.

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).

________________

GEORGE FOLEY, JR.

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Sanders v. Mingo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Sep 6, 2012
Case No. 2:11-cv-01398-PMP-GWF (D. Nev. Sep. 6, 2012)
Case details for

Sanders v. Mingo

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY SANDERS, Plaintiff, v. MS. MINGO, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Sep 6, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:11-cv-01398-PMP-GWF (D. Nev. Sep. 6, 2012)