Willingham v. Howard

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * Tiffanie Willingham, Case No. 2:24-cv-01982-JAD-DJA Plaintiff, Report and Recommendation v. Brian Howard dba The Tow Truck Company, Defendant. On October 31, 2024, the Court denied Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, and gave Plaintiff until December 2, 2024, to file an updated application. (ECF No. 3). In doing so, the Court warned Plaintiff that “[f]ailure to timely comply with this order may result in a recommendation to the district judge that this case be dismissed.” (Id.). To date, Plaintiff has neither filed an updated application to proceed in forma pauperis nor filed anything further on the docket. Accordingly, the Court recommends dismissal of this case without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice allows Plaintiff to refile a case with the Court, under a new case number. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to send this recommendation to Plaintiff. Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2 any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within (14) days after service of this Notice. 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 time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). DATED: January 6, 2025 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE