Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided September 23, 2022·No. 2:16-cv-00931·Unknown

Opinion

***

Plaintiff, 2:16-cv-00931-APG-VCF

vs. ORDER

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF MOTION TO EXTEND TIME [ECF No. 119] CORRECTIONS, et al, Defendants.

Pro se plaintiff filed a motion to extend time, asking the court for an additional forty-five days to file a dispositive motion. ECF No. 118. Dispositive motions were due September 1, 2022. ECF No. 113. Defendants filed a notice of non-opposition, stating that they do not oppose allowing plaintiff to take an additional forty-five days to file his dispositive motion. ECF No. 120. I grant the motion to extend time. Given how long this case has been open, I warn plaintiff that I will not extend this deadline again absent extraordinary circumstances. Accordingly, I ORDER that the plaintiff’s motion to extend time (ECF No. 119) is GRANTED. I FURTHER ORDER that plaintiff has until Monday, November 7, 2022, to file his dispositive motion. NOTICE Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in writing 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 may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified 1 time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file 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 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. DATED this 23rd day of September 2022. Kx ? SZ □ ie © Lo i CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections, (D. Nev. 2022).

Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections (Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Arn
474 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1986)