Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_11-cv-00102/USCOURTS-azd-4_11-cv-00102-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eric Evans; et al., )

)

 Plaintiffs, ) CV 11-00102 TUC CKJ (JM)

)

 v. )

) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Juan A. Buelna, et al., )

)

)

 Defendants. )

 )

Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on February 14, 2011. By order dated June 24, 2011,

the Court extended the deadline to serve the Defendants to August 14, 2011 (Doc. 7). As of

October 13, 2011, service had not been completed and the Magistrate Judge issued an Order

to Plaintiffs to show cause by November 8, 2011, as to why a report and recommendation

should not issue recommending this matter be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4(m), Fed.R.Civ.P.

Plaintiffs did not respond to the Order to Show Cause and, as of the date of this report and

recommendation, the docket reflects that service has not been made.

Accordingly,

Based on the foregoing, the Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the District

Court, after its independent review, dismiss this action pursuant to Rule 4(m). 

This Recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules of

Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment. 

However, the parties shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of service of a copy

of this recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the District

Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rules 72(b), 6(a) and 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure. Thereafter, the parties have fourteen (14) days within which to file a response to

Case 4:11-cv-00102-CKJ-JR Document 9 Filed 11/09/11 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 -

the objections. If any objections are filed, this action should be designated case number: CV

11-0102-TUC-CKJ. Failure to timely file objections to any factual or legal determination

of the Magistrate Judge may be considered a waiver of a party's right to de novo

consideration of the issues. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th

Cir.2003) (en banc).

DATED this 9th day of November, 2011.

Case 4:11-cv-00102-CKJ-JR Document 9 Filed 11/09/11 Page 2 of 2