Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01707/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01707-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Vallejo
Defendant
Estudillo
Defendant
Greenberg
Defendant
Messina
Defendant
Anthony Craig Smith
Plaintiff
Vallejo Police Department
Defendant

Document Text:

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

 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned,

plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY CRAIG SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1707 WBS EFB P

vs.

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel suing for alleged civil rights violations. See 42

U.S.C. § 1983. He filed his complaint on August 21, 2007. On December 4, 2007, the court

found that the complaint stated cognizable claims as to defendants Greenberg, Estudillo, and

Messina, but not as to defendants City of Vallejo or Vallejo Police Department. The court gave

plaintiff 20 days to submit materials for service of process on defendants Greenberg, Estudillo

and Messina, or, alternatively, 30 days to file an amended complaint.

The times for acting have passed and plaintiff has not submitted the materials necessary

to serve process on defendants Greenberg, Estudillo and Messina, nor has he filed an amended

complaint or otherwise responded to the December 4, 2007, order.1

Case 2:07-cv-01707-WBS-KJN Document 9 Filed 01/31/08 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

current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of documents at the

record address of the party is fully effective.

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are 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 and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: January 31, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01707-WBS-KJN Document 9 Filed 01/31/08 Page 2 of 2