United States District Court, D. Nevada
ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO
(1) DEEM PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT, (2) REQUIRE
PLAINTIFF TO SEEK LEAVE OF COURT BEFORE FILING ANY ADDITIONAL
ACTIONS IN THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA, AND (3) PROHIBIT PLAINTIFF
FROM FILING ANY FURTHER MOTIONS SEEKING RELIEF THAT THE COURT
HAS ALREADY DENIED [ECF NO. 111]
P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3, 2019, Magistrate Judge Ferenbach recommended that (1)
plaintiff Victor Tagle be deemed a vexatious litigant; (2)
Tagle be required to seek leave of Court before filing any
additional actions in the District of Nevada; (3) Tagle's
duplicitous motions for default, to change venue, and for
speedy trial be stricken; and (4) Tagle be prohibited from
filing any further motions seeking relief that the court has
already denied. ECF No. 111. The third recommendation is now
moot because in a previous order, I denied Tagle's
motions for default and his motions that seek relief that has
already been denied in this case. ECF No. 115.
objected to Judge Ferenbach's recommendations, arguing
that Judge Ferenbach is biased, has discriminated against
Tagle, has dismissed many of Tagle's cases “without
review, ” and is now attempting to block Tagle's
legal rights by declaring him vexatious. ECF No. 117. Tagle
contends that Judge Ferenbach is acting under the orders of
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Id.
Additionally, Tagle argues that District Judge Richard
Boulware dismissed some of Tagle's previous cases because
the DHS bribed him to do so. Id.
accusations regarding Judge Ferenbach and Judge Boulware lack
merit. Furthermore, Tagle does not sufficiently address the
legal or substantive concerns raised by Judge Ferenbach,
namely that “[p]laintiff's actions across his many
cases [are] frivolous and harassing, ” that he
“is clearly aware of the burden his conduct places on
the Court, and [that] he ha[s] not changed his
behavior” despite numerous warnings to do so. ECF No.
111 at 4.
reviewed Judge Ferenbach's findings and recommendations
de novo, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also
U.S. v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)
(“the district judge must review the magistrate
judge's findings and recommendations de novo if
objection is made” (emphasis in original)). Judge
Ferenbach's report “cautious[ly] review[s] the
pertinent circumstances, ” compiles “an adequate
record for review, ” and makes appropriate
“substantive findings about the frivolous or harassing
nature of [Tagle's] litigation.” Molski v.
Evergreen Dynasty Corp., 500 F.3d 1047, 1057 (9th Cir.
2007) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 165l(a)). Additionally, his
recommendations are “narrowly tailored to closely fit
the specific vice encountered.” Id. (quoting
De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1148 (9th Cir.
1990)). I therefore adopt Judge Ferenbach's report and
accept his recommendations in full.
THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Victor Tagle is deemed a
FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Victor Tagle is required to
seek leave of Court before filing any additional actions in
the District of Nevada.
any papers, Tagle must apply for leave to do so, and the
proposed suit shall bear the caption “Application
Seeking Leave to File.” If Tagle wishes to file in the
unofficial northern division of the District of Nevada, he
shall mail a copy of the proposed suit to: Clerk's
Office, United States District Court, District of Nevada, 400
South Virginia Street, Reno, Nevada 89501. If Tagle wishes to
file in the unofficial southern division of the District of
Nevada, he shall mail a copy of the proposed suit to:
Clerk's Office, United States District Court, District of
Nevada, 333 Las Vegas Blvd. South Las Vegas, Nevada 89101.
The Application shall be supported by a declaration under
oath by Tagle stating: (1) that the matters asserted in the
new complaint or papers have never been raised and disposed
of on the merits by any court; (2) that the claim or claims
are not frivolous or made in bad faith; and (3) that he has
conducted a reasonable investigation of the facts and his
investigation supports his claim or claims. A copy of this
Order shall be attached to any application.
to fully comply with this Order will be sufficient grounds
for denial of the application. In such circumstances, Tagle
will not be allowed to proceed and his proposed filing shall
be returned to him. If Tagle makes the required showing, the
court will enter the appropriate order and will allow him to
FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Victor Tagle is prohibited
from filing any further motions in this case seeking ...