(PC) Saunders v. Fairman, et al, No. 1:2002cv05806 - Document 150 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending Dismissal of Defendants Fairman, Bingham, Powers, Woods Jennings, and Sanders signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 06/27/2011. Referred to Judge Wanger; Objections to F&R due by 7/15/2011.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
(PC) Saunders v. Fairman, et al Doc. 150 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JASON SAUNDERS, 8 9 10 CASE NO. 1:02-CV-05806-OWW-DLB PC Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANTS FAIRMAN, BINGHAM, POWERS, WOODS, JENNINGS, AND SANDERS (DOC. 111) v. J.W. FAIRMAN, et al., 11 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS Defendants. / 12 13 Plaintiff Jason Saunders (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California 14 Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this 15 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requested service by the United States 16 Marshal to effect service on Defendants J. W. Fairman, Bingham, Powers, Woods, Jennings, and 17 Sanders. On September 17, 2009, the Court ordered Plaintiff to provide the locations of these 18 Defendants. Doc. 111. On October 1, 2009, Plaintiff responded by stating that he was unable to 19 do so because of deprivation of his legal property due to alleged retaliation by Defendants at 20 California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility. Plaintiff declared that once he transferred to a 21 different prison, he would be able to provide this information. However, more than a year has 22 passed, and Plaintiff has not provided the locations of the above listed Defendants for the United 23 States Marshal to effect service. 24 Pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 25 If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff - must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. 26 27 28 Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendants J. W. Fairman, 2 Bingham, Powers, Woods, Jennings, and Sanders be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure 3 to effect service of process. 4 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 5 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen 6 (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file 7 written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 8 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections 9 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 10 11 12 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 27, 2011 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.