Kohli v. Dayal

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8] ERIC KOHLI, Case No. 2:20-cv-00538-CDS-NJK 9 Plaintiff(s), Corrected Order 10] v. 11} AJAY DAYAL, et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 On January 17, 2023, the Court granted the motion to withdraw as defense counsel. Docket 14] No. 107. Defendant Dayal has now filed a letter indicating that he will proceed pro se. Docket 15] No. 116. Defendant Dayal is advised that he must familiarize himself with the Federal Rules of 16] Civil Procedure and the local rules of this Court, as he must comply with these rules despite his 17] lack of counsel. E.g., King v. Ativeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), overruled on other 18] grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2012).! Failure to comply with the 19] governing rules may result in the imposition of sanctions, up to and including case-dispositive 20] sanctions. 21 The Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to update the docket to reflect Defendant Dayal’s 22\| address as stated at Docket No. 116. 24 Dated: February 17, 2023

NancyJ. Koppe 26 United és Magistrate Judge 27), ————_____ ' A party may not file letters with the Court; filings must instead be styled as motions, 28] stipulations, or notices. See, e.g., Local Rule IA 7-1(b).