Thompson v. Gomez et al
Filing
38
ORDER Adopting 35 Findings and Recommendation, and Dismissing Defendant Rodriguez, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/18/19. Rodriguez terminated. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MARK SHANE THOMPSON,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
A. GOMEZ, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION, AND DISMISSING
DEFENDANT RODRIGUEZ PURSUANT TO
RULE 4(M) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE
[ECF No. 35]
Plaintiff Mark Shane Thompson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
On December 19, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation
20
recommending that Defendant Rodriguez be dismissed from the action, without prejudice, pursuant to
21
Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Findings and Recommendation was served on
22
Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections
23
were filed and the time to do so has expired.
24
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de
25
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and
26
Recommendation to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
27
///
28
///
1
1
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
The December 19, 2018, Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 35) is adopted; and
3
2.
Defendant Rodriguez is dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the
4
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
5
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
January 18, 2019
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
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?