1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 SHADAE RAE SEWARD, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-00857-NJK 6 Plaintiff(s), Order Vv. 8]| FRANK J. BISIGNANO, 9 Defendant(s). 10 Plaintiff brings this suit on behalf of her child challenging the denial of the child’s disability 11} claim. See Docket No. 1-1. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The Ninth Circuit has held that “a non- attorney parent must be represented by counsel in bringing an action on behalf of his or her child.” Johns v. Cnty. of San Diego,

, 876 (9th Cir. 1997).! 14 On May 19, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to retain counsel to litigate this case. Docket 15] No. 5 at 1. The Court ordered Plaintiffs retained counsel to file a notice of appearance to represent 16] Plaintiff by July 18, 2025. 7d. The Court warned that “[flailure to comply with this order may 17] result in dismissal of this case.” /d. (emphasis in original). Despite that warning, Plaintiff has 18] not complied with the above order. 19 Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk’s Office is 20] INSTRUCTED to close the case. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: July 28, 2025 23 ASS fe Nancy J. Koppe< 24 United Siats ‘Wiagistrate Judge 25 26 ' The Ninth Circuit has not recognized exceptions to this rule as to any particular type of case. See Grizzell vy. San Elijo Elementary Sch.,

(9th Cir. 2024) 27| (recognizing out-of-circuit authority creating an exception to the counsel mandate in the social security context, but finding that such cases are inconsistent with binding Ninth Circuit precedent), 28] cert. denied, _S.Ct.___,

(May 19, 2025).