Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02829/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02829-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TIMOTHY L. GASTILE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

T. VIRGA, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:11-cv-2829-JAM-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. Despite two attempts, the U.S. Marshal was unable to effect service of process on 

defendants Day or Washington based upon the information provided by plaintiff. ECF Nos. 16, 

29. The court has given plaintiff two opportunities to locate defendants Day and Washington and 

warned plaintiff that failure to provide new instructions or to show good cause for such failure 

would result in a recommendation that these defendants be dismissed. ECF Nos. 7, 17; see also

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (service of process must be effected within 120 days of the filing of the 

complaint unless plaintiff demonstrates good cause). The time for serving defendants has passed 

and plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite good cause. See ECF No. 18. 

///// 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:11-cv-02829-JAM-EFB Document 31 Filed 07/18/13 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 defendants Day and Washington be 

dismissed without prejudice. 

 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: July 17, 2013. 

Case 2:11-cv-02829-JAM-EFB Document 31 Filed 07/18/13 Page 2 of 2