Hubbard v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: April 20, 2022
• Docket: 2:21-cv-02037
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Brent Hubbard, Case No. 2:21-cv-02037-RFB-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Order v. 8 Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, et 9 al.,

10 Defendants.

11 12 13 On January 26, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to withdraw. (ECF 14 No. 12). In that order, the Court required Plaintiff to inform the Court whether he would proceed 15 pro se or retain counsel by February 25, 2022. (Id.). That deadline has since passed, and the 16 Court has had no contact from Plaintiff. The Court thus orders Plaintiff to show cause why he has 17 not filed a notice with the Court informing it whether he intends to retain new counsel or proceed 18 pro se. If Plaintiff does not comply with this Order, the Court will recommend that this action be 19 dismissed. See McClure v. Fessler, 57 Fed.Appx. 727, 727 (9th Cir. 2003) (“the district court 20 may dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute.”). 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff must file a response to this Order within 2 thirty days—by Friday, May 20, 2022. Plaintiff must show cause why he has not complied with 3 the Court’s order requiring him to inform the Court whether he will retain new counsel or proceed 4 pro se. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to mail Plaintiff a copy of this Order. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should Plaintiff not file a response within thirty days 6 from the date of this Order, the Court will recommend dismissal of this action. 7 8 DATED: April 20, 2022 9 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27