Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00473/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00473-26/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER HARBRIDGE, 

Plaintiff,

v.

YATES, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:10-cv-00473-AWI-JLT (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION AND 

DISMISSING DEFENDANTS FERRO, 

BENYAMIN, AND DISHMAN 

PURSUANT TO RULE 4(M)

(Docs. 80, 90, 93, 94, 99)

Plaintiff, Christopher Harbridge, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred 

to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

This action is proceeding under Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint on a number of claims 

against multiple Defendants. On April 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and 

Recommendation to dismiss Defendants Ferro, Benyamin, and Dishman pursuant to Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Doc. 99.) The Findings and Recommendation was served that same 

date and allowed for filing of objections within thirty days. (Id.) Plaintiff did not file any 

objections. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 

Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Case 1:10-cv-00473-DAD-JLT Document 108 Filed 07/10/15 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations, issued 

on April 22, 2015 (Doc. 99), is adopted in full and Defendants Ferro, Benyamin, and Dishman are 

dismissed from this action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 4(m) as 

they have not been served with summonses in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 9, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00473-DAD-JLT Document 108 Filed 07/10/15 Page 2 of 2