Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00867/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00867-17/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

PERRY LEE SISCO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0867 GEB JFM P

vs.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On November 28, 2005, the court ordered the United States Marshal to serve

process on defendants. Process directed to defendants Beruth, Schmidt, Spears and Falconer was

returned unexecuted. Plaintiff subsequently failed to provide additional information for service

of process on these defendants and on March 8, 2006, the court recommended these defendants

be dismissed. By order filed February 5, 2007, the findings and recommendations were vacated

and plaintiff was granted an additional sixty days in which to provide the court with information

necessary to accomplish service of process on these defendants. Plaintiff was cautioned that if

he was unable to provide the information necessary to serve these four defendants by the

deadline, the court would recommend that these defendants be dismissed from this case. The

sixty day period has now passed and plaintiff has filed to provide the information. 

Case 2:05-cv-00867-GEB -JFM Document 52 Filed 04/19/07 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 plaintiff’s claims against

defendants Beruth, Schmidt, Spears and Falconer be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 4(m). 

These findings and recommendations will be 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. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings

and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: April 18, 2007.

1;sisc0867.fusm(3)

Case 2:05-cv-00867-GEB -JFM Document 52 Filed 04/19/07 Page 2 of 2