Robert J. Cipriani v. Resorts World Las Vegas, LLC, et al.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA || Robert J. Cipriani, Case No. 2:23-cv-01626-MMD-MDC 4 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO > VS: REMOVE ATTORNEY (ECF NO. 86) Resorts World Las Vegas, LLC, et al., 7 Defendants.

8 The Court has reviewed the Motion to Remove Attorney (ECF No. 86) (“Motion”). Defendants || Resorts World Las Vegas, LLC and Resorts World Las Vegas hotels, LLC (“defendants”) request to 10 remove David Astur, Esq. as counsel of record in this matter and to no longer receive electronic notices || of filings in this matter. ECF No. 86. Defendants represent that he is longer part of Peterson Baker, || PLLC, the firm representing defendants. /d. Tamara Beatty Peterson, Esq. will continue as counsel for || defendants. For good cause shown and because the Motion is unopposed, the Court grants the Motion.

14 ACCORDINGLY, 15 IT IS ORDERED that: 16 1. The Motion to Remove Attorney (ECF No. 86) is GRANTED.

17 2. David Astur, Esq., is to be removed as counsel of record for defendants Resorts World Las 18 Vegas, LLC and Resorts World Las Vegas hotels, LLC and removed from CM/ECF service in this matter.

20 DATED: January 9, 2026 a1 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hoe Maximifiand D.@ouvillier, II 24 Whited ee Judge 1 NOTICE 2 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).

7 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 10 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

11 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.