Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02705/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02705-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jesus Alejandro Mendoza, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph M. Arpaio; et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-2705-PHX-SRB (GEE)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On September 6, 2005, the plaintiff filed a complaint in this court claiming his civil

rights were being violated by his conditions of confinement. On February 6, 2006, this court

screened the complaint and ordered commencement of service. 

In that service order, the court specifically warned the plaintiff he must complete

service within 60 days of the filing of the order or within the 120-day time limit allowed by

FED.R.CIV.P. 4(m), whichever is later. Failure to do so, the court warned, could lead to

dismissal of the action. See also LRCiv 16.2(b)(2)(B)(i). 

That same day, the court sent service packets to the plaintiff for processing. The

plaintiff, however, did not return the completed packets. The court issued the plaintiff an

order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed. The plaintiff did not file a

response.

The time limits for service have passed, and service has not been completed. 

Case 2:05-cv-02705-SRB-GEE Document 7 Filed 04/28/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

Recommendation

 The Magistrate Judge recommends the District Court, after its independent review of

the record, enter an order 

DISMISSING this action for failure to prosecute.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636 (b), any party may serve and file written objections within

10 days of being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. If objections are

not timely filed, the party’s right to de novo review may be waived. See United States v.

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc). 

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this report and recommendation to all parties.

DATED this 28th day of April, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-02705-SRB-GEE Document 7 Filed 04/28/06 Page 2 of 2