Fernandez-Morales v. Gazzini ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 kkK* 4 YOANDY FERNANDEZ-MORALES, Case No. 3:23-CV-00124-MMD-CLB 5 Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 6 V. DENYING MOTION FOR INTERPRETEF 7 GAZZINI, et. al., 8 Defendants. 9 On January 22, 2024, the Court set a mandatory case management conference (“CMC”) in this case. (ECF No. 24.) The CMC was set for February 8, 2024. (/d.) The Court has reviewed Defendants’ case management report, (ECF No. 36), and finds that acase management conference is no longer necessary in this action. 13 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the CMC set for February 8, 2024, is hereby VACATED. The Court will issue a scheduling order in due course. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for a Spanish translator for 16 purposes of the CMC, (ECF No. 31), is DENIED as moot.’ 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall RESEND ECF Nos. 29, 30, and 31 to Plaintiff at the address listed on the Docket. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. . DATED: January 29, 2024 . 21 UNITED STATES\MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 1 Although Plaintiff's motion is denied as moot in this instance, the Court notes that requests for an interpreter in this action will likely be denied as Fed. R. Civ. P. 43 does 26 | not authorize the court to appoint interpreters for litigants in civil cases for the purpose of translating the overall proceeding. See Loyola v. Potter, 2009 WL 1033398, at *2 (N.D. 97 | Cal. April 16, 2009) (“The court is not authorized to appoint interpreters for itigants in civil cases ....”); Hale v. Vacaville Housing Authority, 2010 WL 318375, at *2 (E.D. Cal. 28 2010). (“[P]laintiff has not shown that this court has the authority to appoint her an interpreter.”).