-DLB (PC) Ramon Reymundo v. James Hartley, No. 1:2008cv01900 - Document 38 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting Findings And Recommendations And Dismissing Defendant Roland From Action Without Prejudice (Doc. 33 ), signed by Senior Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 9/6/2011. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
-DLB (PC) Ramon Reymundo v. James Hartley Doc. 38 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 RAMON REYMUNDO, 9 10 11 CASE NO. 1:08-CV-01900-OWW-DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING DEFENDANT ROLAND FROM ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE v. JAMES HARTLEY, et al., (DOC. 33) 12 13 Defendants. / 14 15 Plaintiff Ramon Reymundo (“Plaintiff”) is a former California state prisoner proceeding pro 16 se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 30, 2010, 17 the Court issued an order directing the United States Marshal to initiate service of process on 18 Defendant Roland. Doc. 20. The United States Marshal was unable to locate and serve Defendant 19 Roland, and on October 19, 2010, returned the USM-285 form and the summons unexecuted. On 20 May 20, 2011, the Court issued an order to show cause why Defendant Roland should not be 21 dismissed for failure to effect service of process. The matter was referred to a United States 22 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 23 On August 4, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was 24 served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings and 25 Recommendations was to be filed within fourteen days. Doc. 33. Neither party filed a timely 26 Objection to the Findings and Recommendations. 27 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 28 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 4, 2011, is adopted in full; and 4 2. Defendant Roland is dismissed from this action without prejudice for failure to effect 5 service of process pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: September 6, 2011 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 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.