Chapman v. Nevada Department Of Transportation

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided May 2, 2025·No. 3:25-cv-00061·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA STEPHANIE T. CHAPMAN, Case No. 3:25-CV-00061-ART-CLB Plaintiff, vs. ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF ORDER AND PRELIMINARY TRANSPORTATION, et al., INJUNCTION (ECF Nos. 11, 12) Defendants. Plaintiff, acting pro se and thus not represented by counsel, has filed a motion for temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction (ECF Nos. 11, 12)1. The motion is signed by “Kameron Hampton” who is not a party to this action. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a), “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name--or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” Additionally, a person who is not a party to an action “cannot, without any disclosed interest in the result thereof, make a motion.” Union Carbide Corp. v. Filtrol Corp., 278 F. Supp. 553, 557 (C.D. Cal.1967)). Under Rule 11(a), “[t]he court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney’s or party’s attention.” Plaintiff shall have until Friday, May 16, 2025 to re-file this motion with her signature as required by Rule 11. If Plaintiff fails to do so, the Court will strike Plaintiff’s motion. I. Conclusion It is therefore ordered that Plaintiff must re-file her motion for temporary 1 ECF Nos. 11 and 12 are identical but docketed separately due to the relief sought. 1 restraining order and/or preliminary injunction with her signature by Friday, 2 May 16, 2025. If Plaintiff fails to do so, the Court will strike Plaintiffs motion. 3 4 Dated this 2"4 day of May 2025. 5 6 Ana jloset Jan 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Chapman v. Nevada Department Of Transportation, (D. Nev. 2025).

Chapman v. Nevada Department Of Transportation (Chapman v. Nevada Department Of Transportation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Union Carbide Corporation v. Filtrol Corporation
278 F. Supp. 553 (C.D. California, 1967)