Booth v. City of Reno
Booth v. City of Reno
Trial Court Opinion
2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5 * * *
6 WILLIAM WARREN BOOTH, Case No. 3:20-cv-00001-MMD-WGC
7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 8 CITY OF RENO, 9 Defendant. 10
11 The Court dismissed this case because Plaintiff failed to update his address in 12 compliance with the Court’s earlier orders on April 6, 2020. (ECF No. 9.) That order was 13 returned as undeliverable. (ECF No. 10.) Between February and September of this year, 14 the United States Marshals Service has forwarded several documents it received from the 15 Washoe County Detention Facility marked with this case number. (ECF Nos. 11, 12, 13, 16 14.) The Clerk of Court categorized two of these documents as pending motions. (ECF 17 Nos. 12, 14.) 18 However, these are fugitive documents because this case was previously closed. 19 If Plaintiff wishes to file a new case, he may do so, but he may not continue to file 20 documents in this closed case. The Court will deny the documents characterized as 21 motions and exercise its inherent authority to strike all of the documents Plaintiff has 22 attempted to file since this case was closed. See, e.g., Mazzeo v. Gibbons, Case No. 2:08- 23 CV-01387-RLH-PA,
2010 WL 3910072, at *3-*4 (D. Nev. Sept. 30, 2010) (explaining the 24 bases of a court’s inherent power to strike unsanctioned documents and enforce litigation 25 management rules and striking unsanctioned documents). 26 It is therefore ordered that the documents categorized as motions filed since this 27 case was closed (ECF Nos. 12, 14) are denied. 28 /// 2 attempted to file since this case was closed. (ECF Nos. 11, 12, 13, 14.) 3 This case remains closed. The Court will summarily strike any further documents 4 filed in this closed case. 5 DATED THIS 2nd Day of September 2021. 6
7 MIRANDA M. DU 8 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown