2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * * 6 MICHAEL D. BRYANT, Case No. 3:20-cv-00187-MMD-WGC 7 Plaintiff, ORDER 8 v. 9 NORTHERN NEVADA CORRECTION CENTER CULINARY, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Plaintiff Michael D. Bryant, an incarcerated individual, initiated this action as a pro 13 se civil rights complaint pursuant to

. (ECF No. 1-1.) The Court dismissed 14 the action without prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to timely file an application to 15 proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee. (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff subsequently filed an 16 application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6), which the Court denied as moot 17 because the case was already closed. (ECF No. 8.) In the Court’s order denying the 18 motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court explained that Plaintiff’s case had been 19 dismissed without prejudice and that Plaintiff could pursue his claims in a new case by 20 filing a complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis in a new action. (Id.) 21 Plaintiff has now filed a new complaint and refiled his previous complaint and 22 application to proceed in forma pauperis in this case. (ECF Nos. 9, 9-1, 9-2.) It appears 23 that Plaintiff intended to initiate a new action, but he included this action’s case number 24 with his new complaint.1 As a result, Plaintiff’s documents were filed in this case, rather 25 /// 26 1Plaintiff did not request that the Court set aside its judgment or provide any explanation for his failure to timely file his application to proceed in forma pauperis. Even 27 if the Court could liberally construe Plaintiff’s filings to constitute a motion to relieve him from the Court’s final judgment due to excusable neglect, without any explanation for the 28 delay Plaintiff does not meet the Pioneer factors. See Pioneer Invs. Servs. Co. v. 1 || than initiating a new action. The Court reiterates that this case is closed. Plaintiff may 2 || pursue his claims in a new action by filing a complaint and an application to proceed in 3 || forma pauperis in a new action. If Plaintiff wishes to initiate a new action, he should not 4 || include the case number from this case with his new complaint or his application to 5 || proceed in forma pauperis. 6 For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that Plaintiff's application to proceed in 7 || forma pauperis (ECF No. 9-2) is denied as moot. 8 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court send Plaintiff the approved form for 9 || filing a § 1983 complaint, instructions for the same, and a copy of his original and newly 10 || filed complaints (ECF Nos. 1-1, 9). The Clerk will also send Plaintiff the approved form 11 || application to proceed in forma pauperis by an inmate, the document entitled information 12 || and instructions for filing an in forma pauperis application, and a copy of his motion to 13 || proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6). 14 DATED THIS 24" day of July 2020. LG) 16 — MIRANDA M. DU 17 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 || Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship,

(1993) (outlining the four-factor test for determining excusable neglect).