Opinion
2:18-cv-0313 KJM KJN P
11-08-2021
DANIEL JESUS ARZAGA, Plaintiff, v. E. SANTIAGO, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel; he paid the filing fee. By an order filed August 27, 2021, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants Haluik and Victoriano. (ECF No. 83.) That thirty day period has passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the court's order as to defendants Haluik and Victoriano.
Plaintiff, who is not proceeding in forma pauperis, was provided multiple opportunities to identify, locate and serve defendants Haluik and Victoriano. (ECF Nos. 32, 47, 50, 64, 72, 83, 88, 94.) On March 11, 2021, the court ordered E-Service on defendants Haluik, and Victoriano. (ECF No. 73.) On April 1, 2021, the CDCR Notice of E-Service Waiver was filed, indicating the CDCR would not waive service for such defendants. (ECF No. 77.) Despite checking with litigation coordinators at CHCF, CCHCS, PIP or Headquarters HR Personnel, defendants Haluik and A. Victoriano could not be identified or located. (ECF No. 77.)
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Haluik and Victoriano be dismissed from this action without prejudice. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).
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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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).