Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02498/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02498-14/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRED LEON JACKSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2498 MCE GGH P

vs.

R. ROWLETT, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed January 31, 2006, the United States Marshal was directed to serve

process on defendants in this action, including Lieutenant Rowlett. On April 20, 2006, the

United States Marshal returned service unexecuted on Lieutenant Rowlett because said

individual is deceased.

On August 8, 2006, the court granted plaintiff sixty days to provide the court with

information regarding the address for service of defendant Rowlett’s estate. On November 3,

2006, the court granted plaintiff an additional thirty days to provide this information.

On December 7, 2006, plaintiff filed a notice of address for defendant Rowlett’s

estate. According to plaintiff, defendant Rowlett’s estate could be served at the Office of the

California Department of Corrections. On December 12, 2006, the court sent plaintiff the forms

necessary to effect service of defendant Rowlett’s estate. On January 5, 2007, plaintiff returned

Case 2:05-cv-02498-MCE -GGH Document 58 Filed 06/27/07 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

2

those documents and on January 26, 2007, the court ordered the U.S. Marshal to attempt service

of defendant Rowlett’s estate.

On May 22, 2007, service of defendant Rowlett’s estate was returned unexecuted.

According to the information on the returned USM-285 form, the California Department of

Corrections is unable to accept service for defendant Rowlett’s estate.

For the reasons discussed above, the court finds that defendant Rowlett’s estate

cannot be served. There is no good cause to grant plaintiff additional opportunity to attempt to

effect service of defendant Rowlett’s estate.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the claims against

defendant Rowlett be dismissed.

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 twenty

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.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: 6/27/07

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

jack2498.57

Case 2:05-cv-02498-MCE -GGH Document 58 Filed 06/27/07 Page 2 of 2