Mark Richard Hunt v. Christina Denning, et al

Opinion

Mark Richard Hunt, 2:25-cv-01694-MMD-MDC Plaintiff(s), ORDER vs.

Christina Denning, et al, Defendant(s). Plaintiff Mark Richard Hunt’s mail from the Court has been returned as undeliverable. ECF Nos. 34 and 35. The Court notes that plaintiff has listed two different addresses in different filings. See ECF No. 33 (plaintiff stating his address is “5 Platypus Street”) and ECF No. 4 (plaintiff stating his address is “9 Platypus Street”). Plaintiff has not, however, filed a change of address notice with the Court. Plaintiff is reminded that a “pro se party must immediately file with the court written notification of any change of mailing address, email address, telephone number, or facsimile number.” Nev. Loc. R. Prac. 3-1. “The notification must include proof of service on each opposing party or the party’s attorney.” Id. “Failure to comply with this rule may result in the dismissal of the action, entry of default judgment, or other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the court.” Id. IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff has until February 27, 2026, to file his updated address with the Court. 2. Plaintiff is CAUTIONED that this action may be subject to dismissal if he fails to comply. 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send plaintiff a courtesy copy of this order by: a. emailing it to juggernautbymarkhunt@gmail.com; b. mailing it to 9 Platypus Street, Cobbitty, New South Wales 2570, AU; and c. mailing it to 5 Platypus Street, Cobbitty, New South Wales 2570, AU. Dated: January 29, 2026. 4 Ay □□ Of Hon. Mayimitieeno Ts owvillier II UnitepSigh< Magi Judge ff i i j Noricy” if Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to gfders andfreports and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in Writipé and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified 1p || time. Thomas vy. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file 13. objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. ! Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Pursuant to LR IA 3-1, plaintiffs must immediately file written '7 || notification with the court of any change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon . . . . each opposing party’s attorney, or upon the opposing party if the party is unrepresented by counsel. Failure to comply with this rule may result in dismissal of the action.