Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01176/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01176-2/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

Robert Unruh, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joe Arpaio, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-1176-PHX-DGC (GEE)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On April 18, 2005, the plaintiff, an inmate at the Durango Jail in Phoenix, Arizona,

filed a complaint in this court claiming his civil rights were being violated by his conditions

of confinement. On May 4, 2005, this court issued an order which, among other things,

notified the plaintiff that he must immediately advise this court of any change in his address.

He was specifically warned failure to do so could result in dismissal of the action for failure

to prosecute. 

On January 10, 2006, this court screened the complaint and ordered commencement

of service. A service packet was sent to the plaintiff, but it was returned marked “return to

sender” and “released 06/24/05.” 

Service in a prisoner case must be effected within 60 days of the filing of the service

order or 120 days from the filing of the complaint, whichever is later. LRCiv.

16.2(b)(2)(B)(i). These deadlines have passed and service has not been accomplished. 

Case 2:05-cv-01176-DGC Document 9 Filed 03/15/06 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 -

Recommendation

 The Magistrate Judge recommends the District Court, after its independent review of

the record, enter an order 

DISMISSING this action for failure to prosecute.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636 (b), any party may serve and file written objections within

10 days of being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. If objections are

not timely filed, the party’s right to de novo review may be waived. See United States v.

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc). If objections are filed, the

parties should direct them to the District Court by using the following case number: CIV 05-

1176-PHX-DGC. 

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this report and recommendation to all parties.

DATED this 15th day of March, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-01176-DGC Document 9 Filed 03/15/06 Page 2 of 2