Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01970/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01970-4/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEE THIEL PAYNE,

Plaintiff, No. 2:11-cv-1970 LKK EFB P

vs.

J. MARTIN, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

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

U.S.C. § 1983. The U.S. Marshal was unable to effect service of process on defendant Martin

based on the information provided by plaintiff. Therefore, on October 17, 2012, the court

directed plaintiff to provide new instructions for service. Plaintiff has not provided new

instructions or otherwise responded to the court’s order. The court has given plaintiff two

opportunities to locate defendant Martin and warned plaintiff that failure to provide new

instructions or to show good cause for such failure would result in a recommendation that this

action be dismissed as to defendant Martin. See 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). 

////

////

1

Case 2:11-cv-01970-TLN-EFB Document 37 Filed 12/19/12 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

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that defendant Martin 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: December 19, 2012.

2

Case 2:11-cv-01970-TLN-EFB Document 37 Filed 12/19/12 Page 2 of 2