De La Cruz v. Graber et al

Filing 114

ORDER ADOPTING 113 Report and Recommendation. Plf's cause of action against all "Doe" defendants is dismissed w/o prejudice, for failure to effect timely service of process. Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 1/31/2018. (llg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
ARMANDO GARCIA DE LA CRUZ, )
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
-vs)
)
JOHN DOE WARDEN, FTC, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.

Case No. CIV-16-0181-F

ORDER
Plaintiff Armando Garcia De La Cruz, a state prisoner appearing pro se, brings
this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging various violations of his
constitutional rights.
The procedural background of this action is set out in Magistrate Judge
Shon T. Erwin’s Report and Recommendation of December 28, 2017. Doc. no. 113.
As made clear in the “Background” portion of the Report, the only remaining claims
before this court are those alleged against various “Doe” defendants. The “Analysis”
portion of the Report explains that despite the magistrate judge’s order that plaintiff
show cause by September 21, 2017 as to why claims against the “Doe” defendants
should not be dismissed, plaintiff has failed to do so and has not responded to that
order in any respect. After explaining why no mandatory or permissive extension
of time for service is warranted, the Report recommends that plaintiff’s cause of
action against all “Doe” defendants be dismissed without prejudice for failure to
effect timely service of process pursuant to Rule 4(m), Fed. R. Civ. P.
The Report advises the parties that any objection to the Report must be filed
by January 16, 2018, and that failure to make timely objection waives the right to

appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report. No objection
to the Report has been filed and no request has been made for an extension of time
within which to object or otherwise respond to the Report.
Having reviewed the Report, and with there being no objection to the Report,
the court concurs in the recommended rulings as stated in the Report. The Report
(doc. no. 113) is ACCEPTED, ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. As recommended
in the Report, plaintiff’s cause of action against all “Doe” defendants is dismissed
without prejudice, for failure to effect timely service of process. See, Rule 4(m),
Fed. R. Civ. P.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of January, 2018.

16-0181p003.docx

2