Angelica B. Wallace Bazile v. Department of Disability Services, et al.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA || Angelica B. Wallace Bazile, Case No. 2:25-cv-01887-JAD-MDC 4 Plaintiff, s || vs. ORDER DENYING MOTION (ECF NO. 12) ‘ Department of Disability Services, et al., Defendants.

8 Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reverse 01/02/2026 Decision (“Motion”) (ECF No. 12). Plaintiff || seems to request that the Court reverse an adverse decision that was issued by defendant Department of || Disability Services. See ECF No. 12. However, plaintiff has not served any of the defendants and a Rule || 4(m) notice has been issued in this case. ECF No. 11. The Court thus currently lacks jurisdiction over || the defendants and cannot consider plaintiffs requested relief in the Motion. The Court therefore || DENIES the Motion without prejudice. Plaintiff must properly serve defendants and file proofs of || service by the deadline stated in the Rule 4(m) Notice (ECF No. 11).

15 ACCORDINGLY, 16 IT IS ORDERED that: 17 1. Plaintiff's Motion for Reverse 01/02/2026 Decision (ECF No. 12) is DENIED without 18 prejudice.

19 2. Plaintiff must properly serve defendants and file proofs of service by the deadline stated 20 in the Rule 4(m) Notice (ECF No. 11).

21 DATED: January 22, 2026.

22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 1, pb FO Hoi. Maximjténo D. CoAivillier, IT féenited 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). 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.

13 Failure to comply with this rule may result in dismissal of the action.