Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01463/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01463-3/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

TONIE ELMORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1463 WBS EFB P

vs.

ARONG, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel suing for alleged civil rights violations. See 42

U.S.C. § 1983. He filed his amended complaint on October 12, 2007. On December 4, 2007, the

court found that the amended complaint continued to state cognizable claims as to defendants

Maxham and Rendon, but not as to defendants Wedell, Heintschell, Williamson, May, Kaley or

Hawkins. The court gave plaintiff 20 days to submit materials for service of process on

defendants Maxham and Rendon, or, alternatively, 30 days to file a second-amended complaint.

The times for acting have passed and plaintiff has not submitted the materials necessary

to serve process on defendants Maxham and Rendon, nor has he filed an amended complaint or

otherwise responded to the December 4, 2007, order.

////

////

Case 2:07-cv-01463-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 01/31/08 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

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.” 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: January 31, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01463-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 01/31/08 Page 2 of 2