From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ortiz v. Floresca

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 21, 2005
03 Civ. 4436 (LAK) (RLE) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 21, 2005)

Opinion

03 Civ. 4436 (LAK) (RLE).

October 21, 2005


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


This is a pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff Julio Flores alleges that he was denied proper medical assistance while incarcerated. Flores filed the complaint on June 19, 2003, and the matter was referred to the undersigned for general pretrial matters on February 10, 2004. The docket indicates that plaintiff served defendants, but proof of service is not in the file. On September 3, 2004, the Court ordered Flores to provide proof of service within twenty days. The letter was returned to the Court as undeliverable. On October 21, 2005, an immigration officer informed the Court that Flores was deported to the Dominican Republic on July 7, 2004. Flores has failed to contact the Court since his deportation. Moreover, the record indicates that defendants have not been served with a copy of the summons and complaint.

Accordingly, I recommend that the above-entitled action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Pursuant to Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall have ten (10) days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation. Such objections shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court and served on all adversaries, with extra copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Lewis A. served on all adversaries, with extra copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Lewis A. Kaplan, 500 Pearl Street, Room 1310, and to the chambers of the undersigned, Room 1970. Failure to file timely objections shall constitute a waiver of those objections both in the District Court and on later appeal to the United States Court of Appeals. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); Small v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989) ( per curiam ); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (West Supp. 1995); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, 6(a), 6(e).


Summaries of

Ortiz v. Floresca

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Oct 21, 2005
03 Civ. 4436 (LAK) (RLE) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 21, 2005)
Case details for

Ortiz v. Floresca

Case Details

Full title:JULIO ORTIZ, Plaintiff, v. JESUS FLORESCA, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Oct 21, 2005

Citations

03 Civ. 4436 (LAK) (RLE) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 21, 2005)