Morris v. Bradford et al

Filing 14

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/21/12 recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

LEON E. MORRIS,

11

Plaintiff,

12

No. 2: 11-cv-1171 LKK DAD P

vs.

13

A.J. R BRADFORD, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
/

16

By an order filed July 26, 2012, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return

17

to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants.

18

That thirty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the court’s

19

order.

20
21
22

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed
without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States

23

District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

24

fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

25

written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings

26

and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within
1

1

fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections

2

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.

3

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

4

DATED: September 21, 2012.

5
6
7
8
9

DAD:dpw
morr1171.fusm

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2