Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03892/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03892-0/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

Eugene Anderson, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Maricopa County Sheriffs Office; et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-3892-PHX-JAT (GEE)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On December 2, 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. That same day, the court issued an assignment order which,

among other things, notified the plaintiff that he must immediately advise this court of any

change in his address. The court specifically warned failure to do so could result in dismissal

of the action for failure to prosecute. 

On April 21, 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 “release.” 

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.

Case 2:05-cv-03892-JAT-GEE Document 6 Filed 06/28/06 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 -

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

plaintiff apparently has changed his address without advising the court.

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). 

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

DATED this 28th day of June, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-03892-JAT-GEE Document 6 Filed 06/28/06 Page 2 of 2