Riggs v. Davis

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: March 10, 2025
• Docket: 3:24-cv-00443
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 3 * * * 4 4 DANIEL RIGGS, et al., Case No.: 3:24-cv-00443-ART-CLB

5 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 6 v. [ECF No. 3] 7 7 SCOTT DAVIS, et al.,

8 8 Defendants. 9 9 10 10 I. DISCUSSION 11 11 Plaintiffs Daniel Riggs and Bryan Harmer each filed an application to proceed in 12 12 forma pauperis for inmates. (ECF Nos. 1, 3). However, Harmer subsequently filed an 13 13 updated address indicating that he is no longer incarcerated. (ECF No. 11). The Court 14 14 denies Harmer’s application to proceed in forma pauperis for inmates as moot because 15 15 he is no longer incarcerated. The Court now directs Harmer to file an application to 16 16 proceed in forma pauperis by a non-prisoner or pay the full filing fee of $405 on or before 1 17 7 April 6, 2025.1 18 18 The Court also notes that Under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 19 19 a plaintiff who is not represented by counsel is required to sign any pleading, including 20 20 the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). Furthermore, pro se litigants have no authority to 21 21 represent anyone other than themselves. See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 22 22 n.1 (9th Cir. 1995); C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696, 697 (9th Cir. 23 23 1987). As such, Harmer and Riggs will each be required to sign any pleading filed on his 24 24

25 1 The Court notes that the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) directs that “if a 25 prisoner brings a civil action or files an appeal in forma pauperis, the prisoner shall be 26 26 required to pay the full amount of a filing fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Because Riggs is 27 still a prisoner, the PLRA applies to him, and he will be responsible for the full amount of 27 the filing fee regardless of whether Harmer files an application to proceed in forma 28 pauperis for non-prisoners or pays the $405 filing fee. 4| behalf. It is not clear whether it will be practical for Riggs and Harmer to proceed together 2| in asingle action now that Harmer has been released from custody. The Court defers a 3} decision regarding joinder of the Plaintiffs. However, if either Plaintiff would prefer to 4| proceed on his own, he may file a motion requesting that the Court sever this action into 5| two separate cases. 6| I. CONCLUSION 7 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Bryan Harmer’s application to proceed 8] in forma pauperis for inmates, (ECF No. 3), is DENIED as moot. 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, by no later than April 6, 2025, Harmer will either: 10} (1) file a fully complete application to proceed in forma pauperis for non-prisoners; or (2) 41| pay the full filing fee of $405. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall SEND Harmer the 43] approved form application to proceed in forma pauperis by a non-prisoner, as well as the 44| document entitled information and instructions for filing an in forma pauperis application. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Harmer fails to timely comply with this order, 16| this action will be subject to dismissal without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice 47| allows Harmer to refile the case with the Court, under a new case number, when Harmer 48| can file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis for non-prisoners or pay the 49] required filing fee. 20 DATED THIS 10th day of March 2025. 21 ‘

22 UNITED STATES\MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27