Warren v. Heartland Homeowners Association

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA Allanna Warren, 2:24-cv-00205-APG-MDC 5 oe Plaintiff, ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO PAY || Vs. THE FILING FEE OR FILE A RENEWED IFP APPLICATION Heartland Homeowners Association, et al., Defendants.

10 The Court previously denied pro se plaintiff Allanna Warren’s Application To Proceed In Forma || Pauperis (“IFP”) without prejudice. ECF No. 3. The Court ordered the plaintiff to either refile the long || form IFP application or to pay the filing fee within thirty days. Jd. The plaintiff appealed! to the Ninth Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit dismissed her appeal. ECF Nos. 15 and 16. Given that the plaintiff's appeal is now resolved, the Court sua sponte extends the deadline for plaintiff to comply with the Court’s previous Order. ECF No. 3.

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT: 1. By July 22, 2025, plaintiff must fully comply with the Court’s previous Order (ECF No. 3) by 19 either (1) filing the long form application to proceed in forma pauperis as specified in the Court’s 20 order or (2) paying the full fee for filing a civil action.

1 2. Failure to comply with this Order may result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed.

22 DATED July 8, 2025. Mp Fo 23 Hon/Migaimiligh&XD. Couviler III Kisiited States/Magibtrate Jwige 24 ff □□□ || The Court notes that plaintiff paid the filing fee for her Ninth Circuit appeal. ECF No. 5.

NOTICE Pursuant to Local Rules IB 3-1 and IB 3-2, a party may object to orders and reports and 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, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (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. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Pursuant to LR IA 3-1, plaintiffs 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.