LO v. ETT GAMING, 2:12-cv-01887-APG-PAL. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20151116c55
Visitors: 11
Filed: Nov. 12, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 12, 2015
Summary: ORDER PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Yung Lo's "Motion for Definite Document" (Dkt. #66); "Motion Regarding Truth of File to Appeal Court" (Dkt. #68); 1 and Response (Dkt. #67) to the Court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #65). Both Motions and the Response were filed November 2, 2015. The response to the order to show cause provides some additional details about her claims. Dkt #66 states limited appointed counsel, Mr. Kemp, did not tell her ab
Summary: ORDER PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Yung Lo's "Motion for Definite Document" (Dkt. #66); "Motion Regarding Truth of File to Appeal Court" (Dkt. #68); 1 and Response (Dkt. #67) to the Court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #65). Both Motions and the Response were filed November 2, 2015. The response to the order to show cause provides some additional details about her claims. Dkt #66 states limited appointed counsel, Mr. Kemp, did not tell her abo..
More
ORDER
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Yung Lo's "Motion for Definite Document" (Dkt. #66); "Motion Regarding Truth of File to Appeal Court" (Dkt. #68);1 and Response (Dkt. #67) to the Court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #65). Both Motions and the Response were filed November 2, 2015. The response to the order to show cause provides some additional details about her claims. Dkt #66 states limited appointed counsel, Mr. Kemp, did not tell her about the stipulation and order requiring a more definite statement if the ENE did not settle the case.
The other motion also appears to be her attempts to provide additional details regarding her claims against Defendants. The court is satisfied that sanctions are not warranted for her failure to timely comply with the court's prior order to provide a more definite statement.
The Court construes her filings (Dkt. ## 66, 67 & 68) as her attempt to show cause and provide a more definite statement concerning her Complaint allegations and claims (Dkt. #5).
IT IS ORDERED Defendants shall treat Plaintiff's filings (Dkt #66, 67 & 68) as her more definite statement and may file any motion deemed appropriate in response.
FootNotes
1. Neither of Ms. Lo's "motions" contain requests for relief from the Court, therefore, they cannot be granted or denied.
Source: Leagle
