Humes v. Lukenbill et al

Filing 37

ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/10/2019 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R 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

JON HUMES,

12

No. 2:17-cv-2609 KJN P
Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

LUKENBILL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Service of process on sole remaining defendant Lukenbill was returned unexecuted on

17
18

February 11, 2019.1 On February 20, 2019, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to

19

the court, within sixty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendant

20

Lukenbill. Such sixty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to

21

the court’s order.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is

22
23

directed to assign a district judge to this case; and

24

////

25

1

26
27
28

Prior service of process on defendant Greg Lukenbill was returned unexecuted on June 8, 2018,
and the court attempted to provide some assistance to plaintiff by order filed November 13, 2018.
However, in the recent unexecuted service, the U.S. Marshal noted that there are two correctional
officers with the last name “Lukenbill” who are employed as correctional officers with the
County, and plaintiff provided insufficient identifying information to determine which officer is
named as defendant herein.
1

1
2
3

IT IS 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: May 10, 2019

11
12
/hume2609.fusm

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2