Priscella Saintal Bowman v. LV Metropolitan Police Dept., et al.
Priscella Saintal Bowman v. LV Metropolitan Police Dept., et al.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 PRISCELLA SAINTAL BOWMAN, 6 Case No. 2:22-cv-01481-ART-NJK Plaintiff, 7 Order Vv. 8 [Docket No. 166] 9 LV METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPT., et al., 10 Defendants. 11 It appears that Plaintiff has moved without updating the mailing address on the docket. 12] See Docket No. 166. “A party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court apprised 13] of any changes in his mailing address.” Carey v. King,
856 F.2d 1439, 1441(9th Cir. 1988); see 14] also in re Hammer,
940 F.2d 524, 526(9th Cir. 1991). To that end, the local rules require that 15] litigants immediately file with the Court written notification of any change of address, and 16] expressly warn that failure to do so may result in case-dispositive sanctions. See Local Rule IA 3- 17} 1. 18 Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to file a notice of changed address by 19] December 18, 2025. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN 20] DISMISSAL. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: December 10, 2025 Nancy J. Koppe 24 United States) Magistrate Judge 25
26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown