Lowery v. MCSO Officers

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: September 16, 2024
• Docket: 2:24-cv-01194
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Brandon Dale Lowery, Case No. 2:24-cv-01194-GMN-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Report and Recommendation v. 8 MCSO Officers, 9 Defendants. 10 11 On July 26, 2024, the Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis 12 and required him to file a new one on or before August 26, 2024. (ECF No. 8). In doing so, the 13 Court informed Plaintiff that “[f]ailure to timely comply with this order may result in a 14 recommendation to the district judge that this case be dismissed. (Id.). To date, Plaintiff has not 15 filed anything further in this action and appears to have ceased prosecuting it. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 41(b). 17 18 Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without 19 prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send this recommendation to Plaintiff. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 /// 27 /// 1 NOTICE 2 Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2 any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be 3 in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within (14) days after service of this Notice. The 4 Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived 5 due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985), reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986). The Ninth Circuit has also held that (1) failure to 6 file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the 7 objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order and/or appeal factual 8 issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); 9 Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 10

11 DATED: September 16, 2024 12

13 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27