1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 *** 5 6 GRACE ALBANESE, 2:22-cv-00339-RFB-VCF 7 Plaintiff, ORDER 8 vs. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 9 APPLE APPS, et al., PAUPERIS (EFC NO. 1); COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 1-1); MOTION TO RESCIND 10 VEXATIOUS LITIGANT ORDER (ECF NO. 3) Defendants. 11

12 Pro se vexatious litigant plaintiff Grace Albanese filed an application to proceed in forma 13 pauperis (ECF No. 1), complaint (ECF No. 1-1), and motion to rescind vexatious litigant order (ECF 14 No. 3). I strike Albanese’s application, complaint, and motion to rescind vexatious litigant order. ECF 15 Nos. 1, 1-1, and 3. I direct the Clerk of Court to administratively close this case. 16 This Court previously declared Albanese a vexatious litigant. See Albanese v. Federal Bureau of 17 Investigations, Nevada District Court Case No. 2:17-cv-01599-JAD-VCF at ECF No. 7 at 5 (“Albanese 18 is deemed a vexatious litigant under

(a), and she is ENJOINED and PROHIBITED 19 from filing any new complaint, petition, or other action in this court without first obtaining leave from 20 the Chief Judge of this court.”) (emphasis in original). This Court has the inherent power to strike 21 material from the docket to control litigation conduct and to supervise the contents of that docket. Ready 22 Transp., Inc. v. AAR, Mfg.,

(9 Cir. 2010). I find that plaintiff has not complied 23 with this Court’s vexatious litigant order when she filed her application, complaint, and motion. Plaintiff 24 25 1 1 |} will not be prejudiced because she can request leave of Court from the Chief Judge of this court if she 2 || wishes to file a meritorious action per the Court’s prior vexatious litigant order. 3 Accordingly, 4 I ORDER that plaintiff Grace Albanese’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1), 5 || complaint (ECF No. 1-1), and motion to rescind vexatious litigant order is STRIKEN from the record. 6 I FURTHER ORDER that the Clerk of Court is directed to administratively CLOSE this case. 7 NOTICE 8 Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and 9 || recommendations issued by the magistrate judge. Objections must be in writing and filed with the Clerk 10 || of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal 11 determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified 12 || time. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections 13 || within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the 14 || right to appeal the District Court's order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. 15 || Martinez v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist.,

, 16 |} 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Pursuant to LR IA 3-1, the plaintiff must immediately file written notification with 17 || the court of any change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon each opposing 18 || party’s attorney, or upon the opposing party if the party is unrepresented by counsel. Failure to comply 19 || with this rule may result in dismissal of the action. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 DATED this 7th day of March 2022. 22 Load ecto 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25