From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cosey v. Samaniego

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 18, 2019
No. 2: 18-cv-0890 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2019)

Opinion

No. 2: 18-cv-0890 KJN P

10-18-2019

RICHARD CARSON COSEY, Plaintiff, v. JUSTIN SAMANIEGO, et al., Defendants.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By an order filed July 5, 2018, this court ordered plaintiff to complete and return to the court, within thirty days, the USM-285 forms necessary to effect service on defendants. That thirty day period has since passed, and plaintiff has not responded in any way to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall appoint a district judge to this action; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed 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). Dated: October 18, 2019

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Cos890.fusm


Summaries of

Cosey v. Samaniego

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 18, 2019
No. 2: 18-cv-0890 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2019)
Case details for

Cosey v. Samaniego

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD CARSON COSEY, Plaintiff, v. JUSTIN SAMANIEGO, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 18, 2019

Citations

No. 2: 18-cv-0890 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2019)