Green v. Scally

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedJuly 14, 2025
Docket2:23-cv-00244
StatusUnknown

This text of Green v. Scally (Green v. Scally) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Green v. Scally, (D. Nev. 2025).

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Taelor Green, 2:23-cv-00244-JAD-MDC Plaintiff(s), ORDER vs. 6 7 |! James Scally, et al, 8 Defendant(s). 9 10 Plaintiff Taelor Green’s mail from the Court has been returned as undeliverable, noting that he is 11 || now at Northern Nevada Correctional Center (“NNCC”). ECF Nos. 56 and 57. Plaintiff has not, 12 || however, filed a change of address notice with the Court. Plaintiff is reminded that a “pro se party must 13 immediately file with the court written notification of any change of mailing address, email address, 14 || telephone number, or facsimile number.” Nev. Loc. R. Prac. 3-1. “The notification must include proof of 15 || service on each opposing party or the party’s attorney.” /d. “Failure to comply with this rule may result 16 || in the dismissal of the action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the 17 || court.” Id. 18 IT IS ORDERED that: 19 1. Plaintiff until August 14, 2025, to file his updated address with the Court. 20 2. Plaintiffis CAUTIONED that this action may be subject to dismissal if he fails to comply. 21 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send plaintiff a courtesy copy of this order by 22 delivering it to Northern Nevada Correctional Center’s law ibs — — 23 Dated: July 14, 2025. A ff a

25 po 4 } e Judge

NOTICE 1 Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and 2 recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in writing and filed with the Clerk 3 4 of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal 5 may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified 6 time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file 7 objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues 8 waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the 9 District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. 10 Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Pursuant to LR IA 3-1, plaintiffs must immediately file written 11 notification with the court of any change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon 12 each opposing party’s attorney, or upon the opposing party if the party is unrepresented by counsel. 13 Failure to comply with this rule may result in dismissal of the action. 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

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

Related

Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Green v. Scally, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-scally-nvd-2025.