Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02507/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02507-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JAMES C. MAXEY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

EDMUND G. BROWN, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-2507-JAM-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

On March 30, 2015, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims with prejudice against all 

defendants except Scott Jones.1

 ECF No. 9. The court subsequently directed the clerk to provide 

plaintiff with the forms required to effect service on Jones, and directed plaintiff to provide to the 

U.S. Marshal within fifteen days all information needed to effect service of process. ECF No. 11. 

When plaintiff failed to timely comply, on October 23, 2015, the court ordered plaintiff to supply 

the United States Marshal, within fourteen days from the date of that order, all information 

needed by the Marshal to effect service of process. ECF No. 17. That order further directed 

plaintiff to show cause within fourteen days why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure 

to follow court orders or prosecute the case. The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has 

failed to comply with or otherwise respond to the court’s order. 

 1

 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to 

Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

Case 2:14-cv-02507-JAM-EFB Document 18 Filed 12/02/15 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

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for failure to 

prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

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

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: December 2, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-02507-JAM-EFB Document 18 Filed 12/02/15 Page 2 of 2