Pinner v. Barnes
This text of Pinner v. Barnes (Pinner v. Barnes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6| MELODIE DAWN PINNER, Case No. 2:24-cv-00301-APG-NJK 7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. [Docket No. 38] 91 MICHAEL BARNES et al., 10 Defendants. 11 Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs motion to update the names of Defendants.! Docket 12] No. 38. No response has been filed. Accordingly, the motion to update is GRANTED as 13] unopposed. See Local Rule 7-2(d). 14 The Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to update the docket in that (1) Barnes is changed to Michael Barnes; (2) Moon Kim is changed to Mun H. Kim Jr.; (3) Bateman is changed to 16] Johnathon Bateman; (4) Ruch is changed to James N. Ruch; (5) Toby is changed to Tobey D. 17|| Morris. 18 On July 16, 2025, the Court entered an order extending the deadline to serve Defendant 19] Kim. Docket No. 31. Plaintiff is REMINDED that the deadline to effectuate service as to 20|| Defendant Mun H. Kim Jr. is September 15, 2025. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: September 3, 2025
Nancy J. Koppa\ 24 United Sas Magistrate Judge 25 26
' The Court liberally construes the filings of pro se litigants, particularly those who are 28] prisoners bringing civil rights claims. Blaisdell v. Frappiea, 729 F.3d 1237, 1241 (9th Cir. 2013).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Pinner v. Barnes, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pinner-v-barnes-nvd-2025.