Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01512/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01512-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

JOSE ELYCIO, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIV 05-01512 PHX ROS MEA

)

JOSEPH M. ARPAIO, ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

) 

 Defendant. )

_______________________________)

Plaintiff filed his complaint on May 20, 2005. On

June 13, 2005, the Honorable Roslyn O. Silver issued an order

requiring Plaintiff to complete and return a service packet for

Defendant to the Court by July 5, 2005. That order warned

Plaintiff that his failure to timely comply with the provisions

of the order would result in the dismissal of the complaint

pursuant to Rule 4(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Plaintiff was warned that his failure to acquire a

waiver of service from Defendant or to complete service of

process on Defendant within 60 days of the date that Judge

Silver issued the service order, by August 13, 2005, would

result in the dismissal of the complaint pursuant to Rule 4(m),

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rule 16.2(b)(2)(B), of the

United States District Court for the District of Arizona Local

Rules of Civil Procedure. The civil docket in this matter

Case 2:05-cv-01512-ROS Document 7 Filed 09/27/05 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-

indicates that Plaintiff has failed to acquire a waiver of

service from Defendant or to complete service of process on

Defendant.

Additionally, it appears from the civil docket in this

matter that Plaintiff has been released from custody, and that

Plaintiff has not informed the Court of Plaintiff’s current

address. Plaintiff was warned in the June 13, 2005, order that

his failure to notify the Court of a change in address could

result in dismissal of the complaint pursuant to Rule 41(b),

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

On August 15, 2005, the Court gave Plaintiff until

September 23, 2005, to show cause why this case should not be

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s

order of June 13, 2005, and Plaintiff’s failure to effect

service of process on Defendant as required by the Court’s order

of June 13, 2005, and Rule 4, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff has failed to show cause for his failure to abide by

the Court’s orders and to effect service of process on

Defendant. 

THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this case be

dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to serve the Defendant in this

matter and for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s

order of June 13, 2005.

DATED this 26th day of September, 2005.

Case 2:05-cv-01512-ROS Document 7 Filed 09/27/05 Page 2 of 2