Jacobsen Jr v. Thienhaus et al

Filing 10

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that this case be dismissed for failure to effectuate service pursuant to Rule 4(m). Objections to R&R due by 8/11/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 7/28/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 CRAIG L. JACOBSEN, JR., 11 Plaintiff(s), 12 v. 13 O. THIENHAUS, et al., 14 Defendant(s). 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:16-cv-00331-JAD-NJK REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 16 This is a prisoner civil rights case, in which Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. On August 18, 2016, 17 the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint, allowing one claim to proceed, and ordered service to be 18 completed by Plaintiff submitting USM-285 forms to the United States Marshal. Docket No. 6. Such 19 service having not been completed, on October 31, 2016, the Court issued a notice of intent to dismiss 20 pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Docket No. 8. The Court did not receive 21 any response to that notice. On June 22, 2017, the Court then ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing, 22 no later than July 21, 2017, why this case should not be dismissed due to lack of service. Docket No. 23 9. Plaintiff did not respond. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be 24 dismissed for failure to effectuate service pursuant to Rule 4(m). 25 26 27 28 DATED: July 28, 2017 ______________________________________ NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 1 NOTICE 2 Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2 any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be in 3 writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court within (14) days after service of this Notice. The Supreme 4 Court has held that the courts of appeal may determine that an appeal has been waived due to the failure 5 to file objections within the specified time. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 142 (1985), reh’g denied, 474 6 U.S. 1111 (1986). This Circuit has also held that (1) failure to file objections within the specified time 7 and (2) failure to properly address and brief the objectionable issues waives the right to appeal the 8 District Court’s order and/or appeal factual issues from the order of the District Court. Martinez v. Ylst, 9 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991); Britt v. Simi Valley United Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 10 1983). 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?