Gonzalez v. Hill

Full title: HUMBERTO RUIZ GONZALEZ v. D. HILL, ET AL

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division

Date published: May 1, 2006

Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-495 (E.D. Tex. May. 1, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-495.

May 1, 2006

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THAD HEARTFIELD, District Judge

Plaintiff Humberto Ruiz Gonzalez, a prisoner confined at the United States Penitentiary in Beaumont, Texas, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), against D. Hill, C. Rivers, and G. Szemborski.

The Court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Earl S. Hines, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate judge recommends dismissing the lawsuit pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for insufficient service of process.

The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Plaintiff has filed objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation.

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). Plaintiff has not served the defendants in accordance with Rule 4 or shown good cause for his failure to do so. Plaintiff alleges he unsuccessfully tried to serve the defendants by mail, but he made no further attempts to serve the defendants. In fact, it appears that plaintiff has no intention of assuming responsibility for service. Although plaintiff has been advised twice that he, as a paying litigant, is responsible for serving the defendants, he now requests the Court to serve the defendants. Therefore, after careful consideration, the Court concludes the objections are without merit.

ORDER

Accordingly, plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge's recommendation.