Johnson v. Sisto et al

Filing 82

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/5/2011 RECOMMENDING that pltf's claims against dfts Jones and Peterson be dismissed w/out prejudice. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due w/in 14 days. (Yin, K)

-KJN (PC) Johnson v. Sisto et al

Doc. 82

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. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendants. / By an order filed February 25, 2011, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants Jones and Peterson. That thirty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not provided the necessary documents or responded to the court's February 25, 2011 order. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's claims against defendants Jones and Peterson be dismissed without prejudice. See 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-one 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 and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LACEDRIC JOHNSON, Plaintiff, No. 2:08-cv-1609 KJM KJN P

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

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

days after service of the objections. 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: April 5, 2011

_____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
/john1609.fus

2