King v. Wang et al

Filing 14

ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/24/2015 ORDERING the Clerk to randomly assign a district judge to this action; AND RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DAVID KING,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-1817 DAD P

v.

ORDER AND

WANG,

15

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Defendant.

16
17

By an order filed November 6, 2014, the court ordered plaintiff to complete and return,

18

within thirty days, the USM-285 form and copies of his complaint which are required to effect

19

service on the defendant Wang. On December 24, 2014, plaintiff submitted the copies of the

20

complaint but failed to provide a complete address for defendant Wang on the USM-285 form.
Consequently, by order filed January 6, 2015, the court ordered plaintiff to complete and

21
22

return to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 form necessary to effect service on defendant

23

Wang, including a complete address. That thirty day period has long since passed, and plaintiff

24

has not responded in any way to the court’s order.
In light of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall

25
26

randomly assign a district judge to this action.

27

////

28

////
1

1
2
3

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 District Judge

4

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

5

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

6

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

7

Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time

8

may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th

9

Cir. 1991).

10

Dated: March 24, 2015

11
12
13
14

DAD:10
king1817.fusm

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2