Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-02205/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-02205-0/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 

Jeremiah Phipps, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Charles Ryan, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-14-02205-PHX-NVW (BSB)

REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on its own review. On March 13, 2015, the Court 

ordered Plaintiff to return to the Court, within twenty-one days, completed service 

packets for service on Defendant Churchwell. (Doc. 17 at 7.) 

 The deadline for returning the completed service packets passed, and Plaintiff did 

not return completed service packets to the Court. Accordingly, on April 24, 2015, the 

Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause on or before May 15, 2015 why this matter should 

not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or 

to comply with [the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] or a court order . . . ). (Doc. 18.) 

 Plaintiff has neither responded to the Court’s April 24, 2015 Order nor returned a 

completed service packet to the Court. Accordingly, it is recommended that this matter 

be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with the Court’s March 13, 2015 

and April 24, 2015 Orders. (Docs. 17, 18.) 

 Accordingly, 

Case 2:14-cv-02205-NVW Document 19 Filed 05/29/15 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Court dismiss this matter without prejudice for 

failure to comply with Court orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

 This recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 4(a)(1), should not be filed until entry of the District Court’s judgment. The 

parties have fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of this recommendation 

within which to file specific written objections with the Court. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 and 72. Thereafter, the parties have fourteen days within 

which to file a response to the objections. Failure to file timely objections to the 

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation may result in the District Court’s 

acceptance of the Report and Recommendation without further review. See United States

v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Failure to file timely objections to 

any factual determination of the Magistrate Judge may be considered a waiver of a 

party’s right to appellate review of the findings of fact in an order or judgment entered 

pursuant to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. 

 Dated this 28th day of May, 2015. 

 

Case 2:14-cv-02205-NVW Document 19 Filed 05/29/15 Page 2 of 2