Varner v. Judge Guliani ( 2024 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 KHARI S. VARNER, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-01869-RFB-NJK 7 Plaintiff(s), REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 8 v. 9 JUDGE GULIANI, et al., 10 Defendant(s). 11 On April 19, 2024, the Court screened Plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 12 1915(e). Docket No. 36. The Court therein identified several deficiencies, including that (1) 13 Plaintiffs filed by petitions for habeas relief and civil rights complaints in the same case, (2) the 14 pleadings were not complete in and of themselves and, instead, consisted of a series of different 15 filings, (3) the most recent complaint was not signed, and (4) the most recent complaint lacked 16 the details required by Rule 8 and appeared to seek relief that is barred by governing Supreme 17 Court precedent. Id. at 2-3. As a result, the Court afforded Plaintiffs “a final opportunity” to file 18 a proper amended complaint. Id. at 3. The same order also required Plaintiff Tera Strawter to 19 either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Id. at 3-4. The 20 amended complaint and Strawter’s application to proceed in forma pauperis were due by May 20, 21 2024. Id. at 4. The Court warned that “FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY 22 RESULT IN DISMISSAL.” Id. (emphasis in original). 23 24 25 26 27 28 ] Strawter did not file an application to proceed in forma pauperis and Plaintiffs did not file an amended complaint,! and the deadline for doing so expired weeks ago. Accordingly, the 3] undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. 4 Dated: June 17, 2024 5 EX = . Nancy J. 6 United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 NOTICE 10 This report and recommendation is submitted to the United States District Judge assigned 11] to this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party who objects to this report and 12] recommendation must file a written objection supported by points and authorities within fourteen 13] days of being served with this report and recommendation. Local Rule IB 3-2(a). Failure to file 14] a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 15] F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991). 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ' Strawter did file a “writ of Certiorari.” Docket No. 38. If this filing was meant to act as an amended complaint, it cannot do so for a number of reasons. Most obviously, the document is 26] not signed, but see Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), and was filed by Strawter alone even though she neither paid the filing fee nor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis, but see 28 U.S.C. § 27! 1914(a), 1915(a); but see also Desai v. Biden, 2021 WL 38169, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2021), adopted, 2021 WL 276236 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2021) (dismissing case for failing to pay the filing 28] fee or filing application to proceed in forma pauperis).