Herrera v. Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX S.S.A.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Daniel Guy Herrera, 4 2:24-cv-00544-MDC Plaintiffs, 5 vs. ORDER STRIKING ROGUE FILINGS (ECF NOS. 17 AND 18) 6 Social Security Administration, et al.,

7 Defendants. 8 This case is closed. On August 6, 2024, the Court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff and t 9 remanded this case. See ECF No. 16. The plaintiff has since filed two new motions in this closed case, 10 specifically a Motion to Compel Compliance (ECF No. 17) and a Motion for Immediate Electronic 11 12 Access (ECF No. 18). Because this case is closed, the Court cannot take action on plaintiff’s filings and 13 thus, the Court strikes them from the record. Spurlock v. F.B.I., 69 F.3d 1010, 1016 (9th Cir. 1995) (the 14 district court has inherent authority to strike improper filings “to promulgate and enforce rules for the 15 management of litigation”). 16 IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: 17 1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Compliance (ECF No. 17) and his Motion for Immediate Electronic 18 Access (ECF No. 18) are both STRICKEN. 19 2. Plaintiff is CAUTIONED that this matter is closed and he may not file any documents in this 20 case. 21 It is so ordered. 22 DATED: December 19, 2024. 23 24 _________________________ Hon. Maximiliano D. Couvillier III 25 United States Magistrate Judge