Brennan v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: January 31, 2022
• Docket: 2:20-cv-00662
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Helen Brennan, Case No. 2:20-cv-00662-RFB-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Order v. 8 Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, et 9 al.,

10 Defendants.

11 12 13 On December 20, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s counsel’s—Craig A. Mueller. of the 14 law firm Craig Mueller and Associates—motion to withdraw. (ECF No. 68). In that order, the 15 Court required Plaintiff to inform the Court whether she would proceed pro se or retain counsel 16 by January 21, 2022. (Id.). That deadline has since passed, and the Court has had no contact 17 from Plaintiff. The Court thus orders Plaintiff to show cause why she has not filed a notice with 18 the Court informing it whether she intends to retain new counsel or proceed pro se. If Plaintiff 19 does not comply with this Order, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed without 20 prejudice. See McClure v. Fessler, 57 Fed.Appx. 727, 727 (9th Cir. 2003) (“the district court may 21 dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute.”). 22 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff must file a response to this Order within 23 thirty days—by Monday, February 27, 2022. Plaintiff must show cause why she has not 24 complied with the Court’s order requiring her to inform the Court whether she retain new counsel 25 or proceed pro se. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail Plaintiff a copy of this Order. 26 27 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should Plaintiff not file a response within thirty days 2 from the date of this Order, the Court may enter sanctions up to and including a recommendation 3 for dismissal. 4 5 DATED: January 31, 2022 6 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27