Coney v. LVMPD Michael Lozo

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * WILLIAM CONEY, Case No. 2:24-cv-00685-GMN-EJY 5 Plaintiff, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 6 v. LVMPD MICHAEL LOZO, et al., 8 Defendants.

10 On July 2, 2024, the Court entered an Order requiring Plaintiff to update his address in accordance with Local Rule IA 3-1. ECF No. 6. The Court gave Plaintiff through and including July 23, 2024 to comply with the Order. Id. The Court explained that failure to comply with the terms of the Court’s Order would result in a recommendation to dismiss this case in its entirety. Id. As of today’s date, Plaintiff has not updated his address or otherwise communicated with the Court. A court may dismiss an action based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action or failure to obey a court order. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992).

17 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this matter be dismissed in its entirety.

18 DATED this 1st August, 2024.

ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 21 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 NOTICE 24 Under Local Rule IB 3-2, any objection to this Finding and Recommendation must be in writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen (14) days. The Supreme Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985). This circuit has also and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).