Williams v. Sandham, et al

Filing 115

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 01/21/09 recommending that defendants Watson and Baron be dismissed from this action without prejudice. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 20 days. (Plummer, M)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. NORMAN BARON, C.M.O., et al., Defendants. / By an order filed June 25, 2008, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the court, within sixty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants Watson and Baron. By order filed November 7, 2009, the time to comply with the June 25, 2008 order was extended by another sixty days. The latter sixty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded to the court's order. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Watson and Baron be dismissed from this action without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Findings 1 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEVEN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, No. 2:03-cv-2044-LKK-JFM (PC)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: January 21, 2009.

12 will2044.fusm

2