Opinion
No. CIV 05-3258-PHX-JAT (GEE).
April 6, 2006
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On October 17, 2005, the plaintiff filed a complaint in this court claiming his civil rights were being violated by his conditions of confinement. On October 25, 2005, this court screened the complaint and ordered commencement of service.
In that service order, the court specifically warned the plaintiff he must complete service within 60 days of the filing of the order or within the 120-day time limit allowed by FED.R.CIV.P. 4(m), whichever is later. Failure to do so, the court warned, could lead to dismissal of the action. See also LRCiv 16.2(b)(2)(B)(i). The court further warned the plaintiff he must immediately advise the court of any change in his address or the action could be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
That same day, the court sent service packets to the plaintiff for processing. The plaintiff, however, did not return the completed packets. The court issued the plaintiff an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed, but the order was returned as undeliverable.
The time limits for service have passed, and service has not been completed. The plaintiff has apparently changed his address without advising the court.
Recommendation
The Magistrate Judge recommends the District Court, after its independent review of the record, enter an order
DISMISSING this action for failure to prosecute.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b), any party may serve and file written objections within 10 days of being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. If objections are not timely filed, the party's right to de novo review may be waived. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). If objections are filed, the parties should direct them to the District Court by using the following case number: CIV 05-3258-PHX-JAT.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this report and recommendation to all parties.