Jacobsen v. Maldinado

Filing 33

ORDER Adopting 24 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DISMISSING Doe Defendants, without Prejudice signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/10/2018. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MICHAEL JACOBSEN, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, Case No. 1:17-cv-00101-AWI-BAM (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. MALDINADO, et al., 14 Defendants. ORDER DISMISSING DOE DEFENDANTS, WITHOUT PREJUDICE (ECF No. 24) 15 16 17 18 Plaintiff Michael Jacobsen is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 30, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and 19 recommendations finding that Plaintiff had failed to name the Doe Defendants and initiate service 20 of process against them within the time required pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 4(m). Thus, the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of all Doe Defendants from this action, 22 without prejudice. (ECF No. 24.) Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff 23 and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after 24 service. (Id. at 3–4.) More than fourteen days have passed, and no objections have been filed. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 26 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 27 the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper 28 analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. 3 4 are adopted in full; 2. 5 6 9 Doe Defendants #1, #2, and #3 are dismissed from this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m); 3. 7 8 The findings and recommendations issued on November 30, 2017, (ECF No. 24) This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s claim for excessive force in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment against Officer Maldonado; and 4. The matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 10, 2018 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?