1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Marcus Caruso, 2:25-cv-00888-JCM-MDC 4 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 5 vs. 6 Madison Advance LLC, et al., 7 Defendant(s). 8 Pending before the Court is plaintiff’s Motion for Pro Se Plaintiff to File Electronically (ECF 9 No. 2). Plaintiff seeks to file his documents via the Court’s CM/ECF system. Id. The Court notes, 10 however, that while plaintiff has paid the filing fee in this case, he has not filed a Complaint. “A civil 11 action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 3. Plaintiff’s Motion for Pro 12 Se Plaintiff to File Electronically (ECF No. 2) is not properly before this Court. Therefore, the Court 13 denies plaintiff’s motion without prejudice. Plaintiff may refile the Motion for Pro Se Plaintiff to File 14 Electronically after filing his Complaint1. 15 16 ACCORDINGLY, 17 IT IS ORDERED that: 18 1. The Motion for Pro Se Plaintiff to File Electronically (ECF No. 2) is DENIED without prejudice. 19 20 2. Plaintiff shall file his Complaint by no later than June 27, 2025. 21 3. The Clerk of the Court is kindly directed to send to Plaintiff the approved form for filing a civil complaint, instructions for the same, and a copy of this Order. 22 23 24 25

1 The form for filing a civil complaint can be found at: https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules/forms/complaint-a-civil-case 4. Failure to timely comply with this Order may result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. 2 3 DATED this 28" day of May 2025. Spy 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 ZL Hon, Seimiliang/. Cue I ‘ Uniéd States ey Judge NOTICE 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 of the Court within fourteen days. LR IB 3-1, 3-2. 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,

(1985). This circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time and (2) failure to properly address 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. YIst,

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

, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Pursuant to LR IA 3-1, the plaintiff must immediately file written notification with the court of any change of address. The notification must include proof of service upon each opposing party’s attorney, or upon the opposing party if the party is unrepresented by counsel. Failure to comply with this rule may result in dismissal of the action.

21 22 23 24 25