DONATELL v. CITY OF LAS VEGAS, 2:15-cv-02334-RFB-NJK. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20160412c36
Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 07, 2016
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . It has come to the Court's attention that documents have been filed in this case with a minor's full name in violation of Special Order No. 108, which requires that only a minor's initials be provided. See, e.g., Docket No. 53. The Court expects strict compliance with its orders and the Local Rules. Failure to comply with them may result in sanctions. See, e.g., Davis v. Clark County Sch. Dist., 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 128937, *5 n.3 (D. Nev. Sept
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . It has come to the Court's attention that documents have been filed in this case with a minor's full name in violation of Special Order No. 108, which requires that only a minor's initials be provided. See, e.g., Docket No. 53. The Court expects strict compliance with its orders and the Local Rules. Failure to comply with them may result in sanctions. See, e.g., Davis v. Clark County Sch. Dist., 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 128937, *5 n.3 (D. Nev. Sept...
More
ORDER
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
It has come to the Court's attention that documents have been filed in this case with a minor's full name in violation of Special Order No. 108, which requires that only a minor's initials be provided. See, e.g., Docket No. 53. The Court expects strict compliance with its orders and the Local Rules. Failure to comply with them may result in sanctions. See, e.g., Davis v. Clark County Sch. Dist., 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 128937, *5 n.3 (D. Nev. Sept. 9, 2013) (sanctioning counsel for repeated failure to comply with Court orders, including order to use only minor's initials in filings).
Accordingly,
1. The Court hereby INSTRUCTS the Clerk's Office to change the docket in this case to remove the minor's full name and replace it with initials.
2. The Court further ORDERS the Clerk's Office to seal the document at Docket No. 53, which is DENIED without prejudice for failure to comply with Special Order No. 108.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
